VOLUME ISSUE 1

The International Journal of

Health, Wellness,
and Society

8FMMOFTT
"
$PODFQUVBM
'SBNFXPSL
GPS
4DIPPMCBTFE
.JOEGVMOFTT

1SPHSBNT

/*$0-&
"-#3&$)5

HEALTHANDSOCIETY.COM
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH, WELLNESS, AND SOCIETY
www.healthandsociety.com

First published in 201 in Champaign, Illinois, USA

by Common Ground Publishing LLC
www.commongroundpublishing.com

ISSN: 2156-8960

© 201 (individual papers), the author(s)

© 201 (selection and editorial matter) Common Ground

All rights reserved. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes
of study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the
applicable copyright legislation, no part of this work may be
reproduced by any process without written permission from the
publisher. For permissions and other inquiries, please contact
cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com.

The International Journal of Health, Wellness, and Society is

peer-reviewed, supported by rigorous processes of criterion-
referenced article ranking and qualitative commentary,
ensuring that only intellectual work of the greatest substance
and highest significance is published.
 Wellness: A Conceptual Framework for School-
based Mindfulness Programs
Nicole Albrecht, RMIT University and Flinders University, Australia

Abstract: The last decade has witnessed an exponential increase in the establishment of school-based mindfulness
programs around the world. A wide range of organizations, from universities to private businesses, have designed
mindfulness programs specifically to suit the school system. A theoretical framework built for educational settings is
required in order to make sense of literature from a wide range of disciplines and methodological perspectives. In the
current article, the author proposes using wellness as a conceptual framework to guide and enhance our appreciation of
mindfulness practice and research. Wellness philosophy, principles, and characteristics are introduced and the
framework is then used to understand the motivation behind cultivating mindfulness in the classroom. It was discovered
that programs are perceived to target a wide range of wellness outcomes, with less emphasis currently placed on the
connection between mindfulness and the environment. Future research and discussion is required to determine whether
wellness can act as a suitable platform to improve and integrate mindfulness practice and research.

Keywords: Mindfulness, Meditation, Wellness, School-based Mindfulness Programs, Mindfulness Education

Introduction

T he last decade has witnessed an exponential increase in the establishment of school-based

mindfulness programs around the world (Albrecht, Albrecht, and Cohen 2012; Black,
Milman, and Sussman 2009). A wide range of organizations, from universities to private
businesses, have designed mindfulness programs specifically to suit the school system (see
Garrison Institute 2013).
Mindfulness is mostly used to refer to a way of “being”, which has prescribed
characteristics, activities and programs designed to cultivate this state as well as ancient
meditation techniques rooted in various religions (Albrecht et al. 2012). It may be broadly
described as a natural human capacity, which involves observing, participating and accepting
each of life’s moments from a state of equilibrium or loving kindness (Albrecht et al. 2012).
Mindfulness can be practiced through meditation and contemplation, but may also be cultivated
through paying attention to one’s every day activities (such as eating, gardening, walking and
listening) and school-based activities (such as class work) (Albrecht et al. 2012). The concept can
be applied to all types of awareness – auditory, gustatory, tactile and visual (Napoli, Krech, and
Holley 2005), as well as one’s thoughts and emotions.
A plethora of questions related to the function and viability of school-based mindfulness
programs remains unanswered (Garrison Institute 2005). To date, research in the area has
focused on assessing the efficacy of mindfulness in child and adolescent populations,
predominately using outcome-based trial designs (Albrecht 2013). Researchers have paid less
attention to discussing and evaluating a conceptual framework or frameworks to guide our
understanding of school-based (5 to 18 years of age) mindfulness programs (Albrecht et al.
2012). A theoretical framework purpose built for educational settings is required in order to make
sense of literature from a wide range of disciplines and methodological perspectives (Albrecht et
al. 2012). In a recent article it was suggested that the popular concept of “wellness” may help fill
this void (Albrecht et al. 2012).
In the current article, the case for a secular and systems-based wellness framework for
school-based mindfulness programs will first be presented. The author will then introduce a
comprehensive wellness framework; acknowledging underlying principles, component parts as
well as the complex interaction between the parts. A number of important principles from various

The International Journal of Health, Wellness, and Society

Volume 4, 2014, www.healthandsociety.com, ISSN 2156-8960
© Common Ground, Nicole Albrecht, All Rights Reserved
Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH, WELLNESS, AND SOCIETY

wellness models, in particular Dunn (1961), who is considered to be the forefather of modern
wellness theory (Albrecht 2011; Palombi 2009) will be outlined. The next phase of inquiry will
involve reviewing literature in order to understand the rationale for implementing school-based
mindfulness programs within the context of wellness.

Towards a Conceptual Framework for Mindfulness

A number of researchers have suggested the need to find a conceptual framework to guide our
understanding of mindfulness research and practice (Albrecht et al. 2012; Harnett and Dawe
2012; Ospina 2009). Mindfulness has attracted a multitude of interpretations both in the East and
more recently in the West (Bodhi 2013; Grossman 2008). Each thinker, writer or researcher’s
understanding and foundation for defining the construct is reflected in the dynamic interplay of a
multitude of interacting factors, such as his or her unique worldview; subscription to a religious
or philosophical tradition; academic discipline; meditation experience and prejudices or biases.
As such, mindfulness researcher and practitioner, C. Burke communicated in an email message
to the first author on February 7, 2013, that finding a suitable framework may prove difficult,
especially since the initial impetus for secular adult mindfulness practices is grounded in the
Buddhist central doctrine of the Four Noble Truths and the relief of suffering. Buddhist
frameworks are currently being used in some institutions to provide a foundation for mindfulness
teacher training. For example, Antioch University located in the United States together with the
Barre Center for Buddhist Studies and The Center for Mindful Inquiry run graduate courses
using Buddhist Frameworks to reflect on teaching and learning in their Certificate Program in
Mindfulness for Educators (The Center for Mindful Inquiry 2013).
It is likely, however, that Buddhist doctrines will not provide a suitable framework to guide
the implementation of mindfulness interventions, education or research in a number of countries
around the world. The Four Noble Truths may enhance meaningful comprehension of
mindfulness concepts, however, when a teacher is faced with students from a myriad of cultural
and/or religious beliefs they will need a secular perspective that encourages whole class
connection.
Mindfulness is overwhelmingly considered in the academic literature to be “wellness-
orientated” (Campion and Rocco 2009; Greenberg and Harris 2012; Huppert and Johnson 2010;
Kabat-Zinn 1982; Schonert-Reichl and Lawlor 2010; Shapiro et al. 2008) and a “wellness
intervention”, targeting a wide range of social, emotional, physical, spiritual and cognitive
outcomes (Schoeberlein 2009; Willard 2010). Further, other academic institutions and schools
are using wellness as a framework for delivering mindfulness programs (Garrison Institute
Report 2005; Plummer 2012). For example, the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the
University of Toronto have designed and implemented a course for pre-service teachers
dedicated to cultivating mindfulness principles and practice within the context of wellness
(Meiklejohn et al. 2011; Poulin 2009; Soloway 2011).
Given the popularity and the prevalent use of wellness frameworks in schools around the
world (Cruchon 2009; The State of South Australia 2007; Hollingsworth 2009; McQuaid 2012;
Yager 2011) as opposed to Buddhist frameworks, it seems a natural choice to use the concept as
a vehicle to inform and guide our understanding of school-based mindfulness practices.

What is Wellness?
Wellness, a term often used interchangeably with well-being (Mackey 2000), is not a new
concept. The term has been used in the English language since the 1600s (Miller 2005) but it is
only in the last two decades that the concept has received significant attention. Dunn (1961) was
one of the first authors to significantly expand upon and clearly elucidate the relevance of
wellness to society. He coined the term “High-Level Wellness” and in a series of lectures, journal


 ALBRECHT: WELLNESS

articles and a book outlined his philosophy and interpretation of the construct (Albrecht 2011).
Dunn’s work was influenced by prominent psychologists such as, Maslow, Rogers and Allport
(Dunn 1961) and his work in turn inspired models of wellness by Ardell, Hettler, Hinds, Jourard
and Travis and Ryan (Palombi 1992).
Dunn seems to have had a number of objectives in mind when discussing and writing about
wellness. His primary goal was to trigger an expansion in the way humans view and interact with
the world. “He asked for medical professionals, educators, business leaders and researchers from
all disciplines to rethink their fragmented and compartmentalized view of man, where physical
health is divorced from spiritual health and knowledge is given priority over wisdom” (Albrecht
2011, 2). Dunn invited researchers and professionals to view man instead as “a physical, mental
and spiritual unity – a unity which is constantly undergoing a process of growth and adjustment
within a continually changing physical, biological, social and cultural environment” (Dunn 1959,
789). He encouraged future researchers to develop methods to measure an individual’s wellness,
business leaders to take steps to reverse and prevent the environmental destruction that was
emerging and for educators to nourish in their students the development of an expanded
worldview, one that embraces wisdom and compassion. These steps were viewed as a critical
foundation for improving the world and revitalizing and enhancing humans’ and the planet’s
health (Dunn 1957, 1959).
Dunn’s conception and interpretation of wellness is prevalent throughout disciplines,
especially in counseling (Roscoe 2009) and positive psychology (Compton and Hoffman 2013).
He broadly defined wellness as:

… an integrated method of functioning which is oriented toward maximizing the

potential of which the individual is capable. It requires that the individual maintain a
continuum of balance and purposeful direction within the environment where he is
functioning (Dunn 1961, 4-5).

It also involves the integration of the whole being of the person – his body, mind, and
his spirit – in the functioning process (Dunn 1961, 159).

His message additionally appears to have found a receptive home in mainstream education
over the last two decades. Wellness models are being used to: connect and make coherent a range
of educational initiatives, projects, policies and practices; enhance and measure improvements in
students’ well-being; identify learners who may be at risk; encourage and engage members of the
community to support and improve student and societal well-being (Cruchon 2009; The State of
South Australia 2007) and guide research initiatives (Hollingsworth 2009) and program
development (Hollingsworth 2009; Konu and Rimplea 2002; McQuaid 2012; Yager 2011).
In order to ground and enhance societal wellbeing, Dunn (1959) suggested that all members
of the community need to work collaboratively and systematically through: research;
measurement; education; model design and practical implementation to enhance societal
wellbeing.

Wellness Unifies Disciplines

Wellness resonates with many of the concepts and ideals expressed and experienced through
meditation techniques (Albrecht 2011, 1), such as mindfulness. The concept which inspired little
interest in the community 50 years ago (Dunn 1961), was recently reported to be a trillion dollar
industry (Global Spa Summit 2010). It is additionally considered to be the principle paradigm
used in counseling and development (Roscoe 2009). Fields such as economics, health promotion,
sociology, anthropology, biomedicine (Cronin de Chavez et al. 2005) and geography (Fleuret and
Atkinson 2007) have also incorporated wellness principles into the theories and models which
govern their respective disciplines (Albrecht 2011). “As a testament to the increased academic


THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH, WELLNESS, AND SOCIETY

interest in the concept and its growing commercialization, wellness has recently emerged as a
discipline in its own right, with the establishment of university undergraduate and graduate
programs” (Albrecht 2011, 1).

Wellness and Systems Theory

Wellness theories follow the central tenets of systems theory (Albrecht 2011; Roscoe 2009).
Systems thinking is not a new concept – it is ancient in origin (Meadows 2008). It has been
employed by many great thinkers of our time, including Einstein (Meadows 2008) and is also a
fundamental element in Buddhist conceptual frameworks (see Teasdale and Chaskalson 2013,
92). The theory has been used to explain the principal features of the interpersonal world of the
infant and describes the infant mind as being dyadic, dialogic and inter-subjective, involving the
participation of a relational partner (Saarinen and Hämäläinen 2010). The child is not simply a
passive recipient of a mother’s attention but naturally influences the world around him. It is
argued that systems capabilities are fundamental in infancy and later in life (Saarinen and
Hämäläinen 2010). Individuals may be encouraged in schooling and in the home to use systems
thinking or it may be curtailed in favor of the more simple and manageable cause and effect,
reductionist world view – a view that dominates academic enquiry today (Paterson et al. 2009).
Core principles of system theory include:
• A system is more than the sum of its parts.
• Many of the interconnections in systems operate through the flow of information.
• The least obvious part of the system, its function or purpose, is often the most
crucial determinant of the system’s behavior.
• System structure is the source of system behavior. System behavior reveals itself as
series of events over time (Meadows 2007, 188).

Systems theory allows for a flexible approach to analyzing complex problems such as the
multilevel and interacting variables that impact the implementation and efficacy of school-based
mindfulness programs. It is essential when assessing mindfulness programs with children that we
consider the practices within a holistic framework, taking into account factors that may
potentially mediate the positive development of physical, behavioral, emotional, social,
intellectual, moral, spiritual and cultural outcomes, such as the child-parent relationship (Harnett
and Dawe 2012). For example, a randomized controlled trial conducted at a school may assess
how a mindfulness intervention impacts a student’s psychological wellbeing but neglect to
consider the family environment and whether it mitigates or promotes the cultivation of
mindfulness. It is considered critical when researching complex interventions such as meditation
and mindfulness that we allow the “system” to remain intact (Verhoef and Vanderheyden 2007).
Systems theory is employed in various disciplines from biology and engineering to
education and management. It is used for policy analysis, hypothesis generation and to test and
explore theories (Urban, Osgood, and Mabry 2011). One of the primary values of the theory is
that it can be used as a guiding framework to gain a better understanding of a problem or
research area (Urban et al. 2011). Employment of a systems-based wellness theory allows the
researcher to gain a holistic viewpoint of a problem through the careful consideration of the
multi-faceted nature of the topic. Sub systems can be analyzed using outcomes-based study
designs and the results will be given perspective and credence within the whole system, while in-
depth qualitative research may shed light on the nature of the whole system and the interacting
elements between its parts.


 ALBRECHT: WELLNESS

Core Wellness Principles

A number of core principles govern Dunn’s interpretation of wellness and these have influenced
the development of wellness models since the 1970s. In an analysis of wellness theories, Roscoe
(2009) found consistency in the way authors outline wellness principles and suggests that when
building a comprehensive framework to examine or practically implement wellness interventions
we need to acknowledge underlying principles, component parts as well as the complex
interaction between the parts.
Core principles that guide our understanding of wellness include:
• wellness is dynamic, forever changing and has many different levels;
• a range of factors combine to form wellness and it emerges from the integrative and
dynamic whole rather than from the sum of its parts (systems theory);
• environmental contexts impact wellness with supportive environments enhancing
wellness;
• life-span developmental changes affect wellness;
• the start of an individual’s life plays a core role in influencing his or her future
wellness;
• striving for wellness is an inherent part of the human condition;
• wellness is orientated towards awakening and evolving consciousness;
• awareness, education and growth are central to the paradigm of wellness;
• individuals experience and express wellness uniquely;
• wellness can be achieved in spite of chronic health conditions and/or disabilities;
• wellness may be enacted differently in different cultures;
• it is essential to recognize the spirit when discussing wellness and
• the concept can be applied to the individual, family, school, wider community and
the world (Albrecht 2013; Cohen 2010; Dunn 1961; Roscoe 2009; The State of
South Australia 2007; Travis and Ryan 2004).

Wheels of Wellness

A number of theorists have employed simple metaphors and diagrammatic explanations to help
convey core principles. One method is to use “wheels”, pie graphs or hexagons to depict how
different dimensions such as spiritual, cognitive, emotional, environmental and physical aspects
combine to form wellness. When a person, for example, over exercises and then neglects
spending time with friends, the wheel is represented in a lop-sided fashion – flat in some
quadrants and the individual’s overall level of wellness is said to be impaired (Greenberg,
Dintiman, and Oakes 2004). An individual may experience “High-Level Wellness” when she has
awareness, knowledge and the ability and motivation to take active steps to keep the tyre
“inflated” in regards to all dimensions of wellbeing (Greenberg et al. 2004; Travis and Ryan
2004).
A visual example of a wheel of wellness is depicted in Figure 1. The wheel acts as a
platform for the delivery of Mindfulness-Based Wellness Education at the Ontario Institute for
Studies in Education at the University of Toronto (Meiklejohn et al. 2011; Poulin 2009; Soloway
2011).


THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH, WELLNESS, AND SOCIETY

Figure 1: Wheel of Wellness

Source: Poulin 2009, 29.

It is interesting to note that the inspiration behind the design of the wheel came from
“indigenous knowledge keepers” (Poulin 2009, 28), rather than modern wellness theory. Poulin
initially focused on the 4-quandrant Native American Medicine Wheel, which represents 4
dimensions of “true learning” – mental, physical, spiritual and emotional (Bopp et al. 2004) to
provide a framework for understanding mindfulness. Native American 1 wisdom says that a
person cannot learn in a whole and balanced manner unless all four dimensions of her being have
been involved in the process (Bopp et al. 2004). Soloway, in 2006, “expanded upon the Medicine
Wheel’s teachings and created a 7-quandrant wheel that integrates traditional knowledge from
Yogic traditions” (cited in Poulin 2009, 29).

Wellness Characteristics

The next step in providing a comprehensive conceptual framework to examine research or assist
with the practical implementation of wellness programs is to outline characteristics or “elements”
that combine to form wellbeing. What does spiritual or physical wellness actually mean?
Elements of wellness are commonly categorized into dimensions (Corbin and Pangrazzi 2001;
Roscoe 2009), according to the model makers’ worldview, preferences and logico-deductive
reasoning. In the current article six wellness dimensions are presented: physical, emotional,
social, cognitive, spiritual and environmental. Some of the characteristics commonly associated
with a high-level of wellness, which the author has synthesized from a range of models and
theories (see Birdsall 2010; Cmich 1984; Epstein, Senzon, and Lemberger 2009; Fleuret and
Atkinson 2007; Maher 1999; Myers and Sweeney 2008; Nash, Meiklejohn, and Sacre 2006;
Pollard and Davidson 2001; Roscoe 2009; Ryff 1989; The State of South Australia 2007; Travis
and Ryan 2004; Witmer and Sweeney 1992) are described in the subsequent sections. The
dimensions largely correspond with the educational model of wellbeing that will later be
explained, except for the inclusion of environmental and ecological characteristics. Age-related
developmental descriptions are largely excluded; however, the characteristics can be adapted for
different age groups. For example, social wellness progresses as follows: from birth through to 5
1
It is recognized that there are problems inherent in using the term, “Native American”. The term was used as a political
necessity to unify oppressed groups of people (Cohen 1998). It has been used in the current paper in order to distinguish
other oppressed and marginalized Indigenous communities from other countries, such as Australia.


 ALBRECHT: WELLNESS

years of age, children build secure attachments with one or more familiar educators. In the first
year of school, students then interact with their peers, teachers and other adults in a range of
contexts. In Year 1 and 2, students begin to develop and exhibit appropriate behaviors for
maintaining positive social relationships (State Government Victoria 2009).

Physical Wellness

Characteristics commonly associated with the physical dimension of wellness include:

• feeling well rested;
• engaging in a wide variety of exercise;
• healthy eating habits;
• functional breathing;
• bio-medical and complementary medicine markers of good health, such as healthy
blood pressure levels and balanced temperature throughout the body;
• feeling good about your body;
• learning about and respecting your body’s needs;
• body consciousness and
• an age appropriate understanding and application of reproductive health and
substance abuse.

Emotional Wellness

Characteristics commonly associated with the emotional dimension of wellness include:

• adequate coping mechanisms and strategies to deal with stress;
• awareness and acceptance of a wide range of thoughts, emotions and action
tendencies;
• the ability to constructively express, manage and integrate feelings;
• optimism;
• resilience;
• the ability to adapt to change;
• emotional regulation;
• openness to new experiences;
• a positive sense of self-regard;
• satisfaction with one’s gender and cultural identity;
• the capacity for forgiveness;
• sharing emotions in a spontaneous way;
• positivity;
• playfulness;
• joyfulness and
• intentional and non-judgmental awareness of moment-to-moment experience.

Social Wellness

Characteristics commonly associated with the social dimension of wellness include:

• effective communication with a wide range of people;
• being a good listener;
• social confidence;
• the ability to love and form deep connections with others;
• giving and receiving with grace;
• altruistic behavior;


THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH, WELLNESS, AND SOCIETY

• maintaining relationships that are free from defensiveness and deceptiveness;

• balancing one’s needs with others’ needs if culturally appropriate;
• building close and fulfilling friendships and intimacy;
• sensitivity to non-verbal communication;
• empathy and sensitivity to the predicaments of others;
• awareness of intrapersonal and interpersonal communication;
• avoiding absolutes, generalizations, labels and judgments;
• honesty;
• compassion and
• helping others when appropriate.

Cognitive Wellness

Characteristics commonly associated with the cognitive dimension of wellness include:

• cognitive and behavioral flexibility;
• good problem solving skills;
• the ability to process information;
• pursuing creative and stimulating mental activities;
• engaging in a wide range of intelligences;
• approaching new problems with equanimity and/or excitement;
• interest and curiosity in learning new things;
• engaging in meta-cognition and
• sustained attention and working memory.

Spiritual Wellness

Characteristics commonly associated with the spiritual dimension of wellness include:

• a sense of freedom;
• seeking meaning and purpose in life;
• enhanced feelings of interconnectedness with life;
• living in the moment;
• paying conscious attention to each aspect of life;
• feeling at peace;
• the ability to transcend and observe life with detachment;
• achieving balance and symmetry among all aspects of life;
• listening to your own inner guidance when approaching tasks;
• the ability to receive and give love;
• understanding the connections with people and the planet that transcends physical
boundaries;
• taking the time to participate in contemplative activities and
• as Coholic, Lougheed, and Lebreton (2009, 30) describe a connection with self and
others, the universe and a higher power that is self-defined – either within or
without a particular faith orientation.

Environmental Wellness

Characteristics commonly associated with the environmental dimension of wellness include:

• living in an area that supports personal wellbeing;
• enjoying, appreciating and spending time outdoors;
• awareness of local, national and world environmental issues;


 ALBRECHT: WELLNESS

• developing the skills and vision to effect environmental change;

• acting in an environmentally friendly manner appropriate to the needs of one’s local
area;
• feeling safe and secure at home, school and in other social environments;
• volunteering time and/or donating towards conservation projects and
• connecting with the environment and understanding man’s influence in the web of
life.

An Educational Model of Wellbeing

An educational model of wellbeing (see The State of South Australia 2007), developed via action
research with over 50 schools in a state of Australia shows how five dimensions of wellness
(physical, emotional, social, cognitive and spiritual) interact to influence a child’s wellbeing and
capacity to learn (see Figure 2). Family, community, political and socio-economic factors
combined with individual characteristics interact to influence a child’s wellbeing, with educators
having the greatest potential to positively influence an individual’s wellbeing within education
and care settings. The five dimensions of wellbeing are considered in the context of four domains
of education practice: learning environment – the ethos/culture and aesthetics of the school,
infrastructure and physical environment; curriculum and pedagogy – the twin process of teaching
and learning; partnerships – the numerous relationships that exist to support learners; and policies
and procedures – system and local statements and directions on significant issues that affect
learner well-being. Wellbeing is considered to be an integral element in the learning process and
acts as framework for understanding the implementation and assessment of wellness initiatives in
schools. In addition, a rigorous inquiry approach of reflecting, questioning, planning and acting
on same is encouraged to allow a deeper understanding of the dynamic concept of wellness and
how it affects wellness.

Figure 2: DECS Learner Wellbeing Framework for birth to year 12

Source: The State of South Australia 2009.


THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH, WELLNESS, AND SOCIETY

Why Teach Mindfulness to Kids?

As mentioned previously, systems theorists stress that the least obvious part of a system, its
function or purpose, is often the most crucial determinant of a system’s behavior (Meadows
2008). For example, the purpose of a university may be to develop nuclear weapons, make
money, indoctrinate people, disseminate knowledge, equip students with the skills to meet
business and governments’ needs or enhance student wellbeing. “A change in purpose changes a
system profoundly, even if every element and interconnection remains the same” (Meadows
2008, 17). Thus, when examining the implementation of school-based mindfulness programs an
essential question to ask is “Why is mindfulness being viewed as a critical component in a
child’s education?” Wellness offers a schema for viewing this problem.
At the time of writing the current article, literature related to the motivation for teaching
children mindfulness had yet to be analyzed. In an effort to locate original research articles
investigating mindfulness practices with school-age children, the author conducted a literature
search during April 2012 and April 2013. The search was limited to the English language and
had no time restrictions. The following databases were searched: CINHAL (EBSCO), Expanded
Academic ASAP (Gale), Google Scholar, Health Collection (Informit), Humanities & Social
Science Journals, ProQuest Education Journals, ProQuest Psychology Journals, ProQuest Social
Science Journals, ProQuest Research Library, PsycINFO (ProQuest), PubMed and SAGE
Journals Online. Search terms used were: Mindfulness AND Schools; Meditation AND Schools;
Mindfulness AND Education; Meditation AND Education; Mindfulness AND Children;
Meditation AND Children; Mindfulness AND Adolescents; and Meditation AND Adolescents.
All fields were searched. In addition, a number of articles were recommended by colleagues that
were not found in the search. Approximately 17 articles exploring the impact of mindfulness with
school-age children were located. Review articles and opinion pieces on the topic were not
evaluated on this occasion, but may provide further information to guide our understanding of the
area in the future. Articles were analyzed it terms of the rational or argument provided for
teaching children mindfulness within the context of wellness.
In the literature, researchers reported the motivation to teach mindfulness to children
stemmed from a number of wellness benefits that have been evidenced in research with adult
populations since the early 1980s and are now being seen in youth populations. Particular
attention was drawn to the physical (Broderick and Metz 2009; Campion and Rocco 2011;
Desmond and Hanich 2010; Joyce et al. 2010; Klatt et al. 2013; Napoli et al. 2005; Schonert-
Reichl and Lawlor 2010; Wall 2005; White 2011), emotional (Broderick and Metz 2009; Coholic
2011; Coholic et al. 2012; Diaz et al. 2012; Huppert and Johnson 2010; Joyce et al. 2010; Klatt et
al. 2013; Mendelson et al. 2010; Monshat et al. 2011; Napoli et al. 2005; Tan and Martin 2012;
Schonert-Reichl and Lawlor 2010; Wall 2005; White 2011), social (Coholic et al. 2009; Coholic
et al. 2012; Diaz et al. 2012; Joyce et al. 2010; Klatt et al. 2013; Mendelson et al. 2010; Monshat
et al. 2011; Schonert-Reichl and Lawlor 2010; Singh et al. 2007; Wall 2005) cognitive (Baijal et
al. 2011; Broderick and Metz 2009; Campion and Rocco 2011; Desmond and Hanich 2010; Diaz
et al. 2012; Flook et al. 2010; Joyce et al. 2010; Klatt et al. 2013; Monshat et al. 2012; Napoli et
al. 2005; Tan and Martin 2012;) and spiritual (Campion and Rocco 2011; Coholic et al. 2009;
Coholic 2011; Klatt et al. 2013; Monshat et al. 2012; Wall 2005) wellness benefits of
participating in the practice. Less attention was paid to the environmental connection with
mindfulness, with only two articles addressing the relevance. Campion and Rocco (2010) and
Wall (2005) outlined how mindfulness can encourage connection with the environment. Wall
(2005) additionally showed how mindfulness techniques can give children perspective in regards
to their place in the web of life. Since some mindfulness programs particularly target
environmental sustainability (Garrison Institute 2005) and the research area is only in the infancy
stage it cannot be presumed at this stage that environmental outcomes are not more broadly
targeted.


 ALBRECHT: WELLNESS

Schonert-Reichl and Lawlor (2010) who examined the effects of a mindfulness-based

education program on pre- and early adolescents’ wellbeing and social and emotional
competence presented a convincing case for the addition of mindfulness to the school
curriculum, moving beyond the focus on wellness outcomes presented in other literature. They
framed their argument in terms of a paradigm shift occurring in the field of psychology (As noted
previously, this shift seems to be occurring across a number of disciplines to varying degrees).
Psychologists in the last 15 years have shifted their attention away from examining human illness
and all the things that can go wrong in a person’s life and are beginning to bring more attention,
regard and consideration to all the things that can go right in a person’s life. Researchers have
found that understanding the attributes, behaviors and activities that lead to human flourishing,
loving-compassion and respect for the environment informs the design and development of
programs that promote positive health and prevent and/or ameliorate unnecessary suffering
(Peterson 2006). Schonert-Reichel and Lawlor (2010) further argue, in line with wellness
theory’s guiding principles, that introducing mindfulness skills early in a child’s life is essential
in promoting positive psychological health and preventing the development of unhealthy
behaviors; with schools widely acknowledged as the major setting in which wellness enhancing
activities should be undertaken.

Conclusion
In the current article the author proposed using wellness as a framework to guide our
comprehension of school-based mindfulness practice and research. Wellness has wide-spread
industry appeal, governs paradigmatic views in a number of academic disciplines and serves as a
platform to unite policies, practices and pedagogy in schools. Wellness philosophy, core concepts
and characteristics have been described and a wellness framework has been used to give
perspective and place in context the motivation for implementing school-based mindfulness
programs. It was seen that mindfulness programs target a wide range of wellness outcomes and a
holistic perspective is needed when designing studies to assess the impact of interventions as
there are a large number of intervening variables that have the potential to mediate results. The
framework was used specifically to tie together mindfulness research employing a range of
methods in child and adolescent populations but it could also be used to make sense of other
wellness programs such as school kitchen gardens initiatives. Further research and discussion is
required to determine whether wellness can act as a suitable platform to enhance and integrate
mindfulness practice and research.

Acknowledgement
I would like to thank: my mother, Dr. Patricia Maria Albrecht from Flinders University in South
Australia for proofing and providing feedback on this article; Professor Rosalind Murray-Harvey
and Dr. Leigh Burrows from Flinders University for encouraging me to submit my thoughts for
publication and Professor Marc Cohen, my boss, from RMIT University for being an
inspirational leader in the emerging academic discipline of wellness.


THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH, WELLNESS, AND SOCIETY

REFERENCES
Albrecht, Nicole J. 2011. “Does Meditation Play an Integral Role in Achieving High-Level
Wellness as Defined by Travis & Ryan (2004)?” Journal of Complementary and
Integrative Medicine 8(1): 1–27. doi:10.2202/1553-3840.1373.
Albrecht, Nicole J., Patricia M. Albrecht, and Marc Cohen. 2012. “Mindfully Teaching in the
Classroom: A Literature Review.” Australian Journal of Teacher Education 37(12): 1-
14. http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol37/iss12/1.
Albrecht, Nicole J. 2013. “Teachers Teaching Mindfulness with Children.” PhD diss., Flinders
University.
Baijal, Shruti, Amishi P. Jha, Anastasia Kiyonaga, Richa Singh, and Narayanan Srinivasan.
2011. “The Influence of Concentrative Meditation Training on the Development of
Attention Networks During Early Adolescence.” Frontiers in Psychology 2: 1–9. doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00153.
Birdsall, Sally. 2010. “Empowering Students to Act: Learning About, Through and From the
Nature of Action.” Australian Journal of Environmental Education 26: 65–84.
http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=731643230572840;res=IELHSS.
Black, David S., Joe Milman, and Steve Sussman. 2009. “Sitting-meditation Interventions
Among Youth: A Review of Treatment Efficacy.” Pediatrics 124: 532–541. doi:
10.1542/peds.2008-3434.
Bodhi, Bhikkhu. 2013. “What Does Mindfulness Really Mean? A Canonical Perspective.” In
Mindfulness: Diverse Perspectives on its Meaning, Origins and Applications, edited by
Mark Williams and Jon Kabat-Zinn, 19–40. New York, NY: Routledge.
Bopp, Judie, Michael Bopp, Lee Brown, and Lane Jr. Phil. 2004. The Sacred Tree. 4th ed. Twin
Lakes, WI: Lotus Press.
Broderick, Patricia C., and Stacie Metz. 2009. “Learning to BREATHE: A Pilot Trial of a
Mindfulness Curriculum for Adolescents.” Advances in School Mental Health
Promotion 2(1): 35–46. doi:10.1080/1754730X.2009.9715696.
Campion, Jonathan, and Sharn Rocco. 2009. “Minding the Mind: The Effects and Potential of a
School-based Meditation Programme for Mental Health Promotion.” Advances in
School Mental Health Promotion 2(1): 47–55.
Cmich, Dianne E. 1984. “Theoretical Perspectives of Holistic Health.” Journal of School Health
54(1): 30–32.
Cohen, Ken. 1998. “Native American Medicine.” Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine
4(6): 45–57.
Cohen, Marc. 2010. “Wellness and the Thermodynamics of a Healthy Lifestyle.” Asia Pacific
Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Education 1(2): 5–12.
Coholic, Diana, Sean Lougheed, and Julie Lebreton. 2009. “The Helpfulness of Holistic Arts-
Based Group Work with Children Living in Foster Care.” Social Work With Groups 32
(1–2): 29–46. doi:10.1080/01609510802290966.
Coholic, Diana. 2011. “Exploring the Feasibility and Benefits of Arts-Based Mindfulness-Based
Practices with Young People in Need: Aiming to Improve Aspects of Self-Awareness
and Resilience.” Child Youth Care Forum 40(4): 303–317. doi:10.1007/s10566-010-
9139-x.
Coholic, Diana, Mark Fraser, Brenda Robinson and Sean Lougheed. 2012. “Promoting
Resilience within Child Protection: The Suitability of Arts-Based and Experiential
Group Programs for Children in Care.” Social Work With Groups 35(4): 345–361.
doi:10.1080/01609513.2011.624974.
Compton, William C., and Edward Hoffman. 2013. Positive Psychology: The Science of
Happiness and Flourishing. 2nd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.


 ALBRECHT: WELLNESS

Corbin, Charles B., and Robert P. Pangrazi. 2001. “Toward a Uniform Definition of Wellness: A
Commentary.” President's Council on Physical Fitness and Sports 3(15): 1–8.
Cruchon, Melissa. 2009. “The Benefits of Integrating Mindfulness and Yoga in the Elementary
Classroom.” Masters thesis, Concordia University. http://www.spectrum.library.
concordia.ca/976621/1/MR63087.pdf.
de Chavez, Anna Cronin, Kathryn Backett-Milburn, Odette Parry, and Stephen Platt. 2005.
“Understanding and Researching Wellbeing: Its Usage in Different Disciplines and
Potential for Health Research and Health Promotion.” Health Education Journal 64(1):
70–87. doi:10.1177/001789690506400108.
Desmond, Cheryl T., and Laurie Hanich. 2010. “The Effects of Mindful Awareness Teaching
Practices on the Executive Functions of Students in an Urban, Low Income Middle
School.” http://www.wellnessworksinschools.com/WWResearchReport2009.pdf.
Diaz, Naelys, Patricia Liehr, Laurie Curnan, Jaime-Lee A. Brown, and Kathy Wall. 2012.
“Playing Games: Listening to the Voices of Children to Tailor a Mindfulness
Intervention.” Children, Youth and Environments 22(2): 273–285.
Dunn, Halbert L. 1957. “Points of Attack for Raising the Levels of Wellness.” Journal of the
National Medical Association 49(4): 225–235. PubMed.gov.
Dunn, Halbert L. 1959. “High-level Wellness for Man and Society.” American Journal of Public
Health: Nations Health 49(6): 786–792. doi:10.2105/AJPH.49.6.786.
Dunn, Halbert L. 1961. High-level Wellness: A Collection of Twenty-nine Short Talks on
Different Aspects of the Theme 'High-level Wellness for Man and Society'. Arlington,
VA: Beatty.
Epstein, Donald M., Simon A. Senzon, and Daniel Lemberger. 2009. “Reorganizational Healing:
A Paradigm for the Advancement of Wellness, Behavior Change, Holistic Practice, and
Healing.” The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine 15(5): 475–487.
doi:10.1089/acm.2009.0043.
Fleuret, Sebastien, and Sarah Atkinson. 2007. “Wellbeing, Health and Geography: A Critical
Review and Research Agenda.” New Zealand Geographer 63(2):106–118. doi:
10.1111/j.1745-7939.2007.00093.x.
Flook, Lisa, Susan L. Smalley, M. Jennifer Kitil, Brian M. Galla, Susan Kaiser-Greenland, Jill
Locke, Eric Ishijima, and Connie Kasari. 2010. “Effects of Mindful Awareness
Practices on Executive Functions in Elementary School Children.” Journal of Applied
School Psychology 26(1): 70–95. doi:10.1080/15377900903379125.
Garrison Institute. 2005. “Contemplation and Education: A Survey of Programs using
Contemplative Techniques in K-12 Educational Settings: A Mapping Report.”
http://ase.tufts.edu/iaryd/documents/researchRefContemplativeEdu.pdf.
Garrison Institute. 2013. Contemplative Education Program Database. http://www.
garrisoninstitute.org/contemplation-and-education/contemplative-education-program-
database.
Global Spa Summit. 2010. “Spas and the Global Wellness Market: Synergies and Opportunities.”
http://www.sri.com/sites/default/files/publications/gss_sri_spasandwellnessreport_rev_8
2010.pdf.
Greenberg, Jerold S., George B. Dintiman, and Barbee M. Oakes. 2004. Physical Fitness and
Wellness: Changing the Way You Look, Feel, and Perform. 3rd ed. Danvers, MA:
Human Kinetics.
Greenberg, Mark T., and Alexis R. Harris. 2012. “Nurturing Mindfulness in Children and Youth:
Current State of Research.” Child Development Perspectives 6(2): 161–166. doi:
10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00215.x.
Grossman, Paul. 2008. “On Measuring Mindfulness in Psychosomatic and Psychological
Research.” Journal of Psychosomatic Research 64(4): 405–408. doi:10.1016/j.
jpsychores.2008.02.001.


THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH, WELLNESS, AND SOCIETY

Harnett, Paul H., and Sharon Dawe. 2012. “Review: The Contribution of Mindfulness-based
Therapies for Children and Families and Proposed Conceptual Integration.” Child and
Adolescent Mental Health 17(4): 195–208. doi:10.1111/j.1475-3588.2011.00643.x_
2012.
Hollingsworth, Mary A. 2009. “Wellness and Academic Performance of Elementary Students.”
Paper based on a program presented at the American Counseling Association Annual
Conference and Exposition, Charlotte, NC, March 19-23.
Huppert, Felicia A., and Daniel M. Johnson. 2010. “A Controlled Trial of Mindfulness Training
in Schools: The importance of Practice for an Impact on Well-being.” The Journal of
Positive Psychology 5(4): 264–274. doi:10.1080/17439761003794148.
Joyce, Andrew, Janet Etty-Leal, Tsharni Zazryn, Amy Hamilton, and Craig Hassed. 2010.
“Exploring a Mindfulness Meditation Program on the Mental Health of Upper Primary
Children: A Pilot Study.” Advances in School Mental Health Promotion 3(2): 17–25.
doi:10.1080/1754730X.2010.9715677.
Kabat-Zinn, Jon. 1982. “An Outpatient Program in Behavioral Medicine for Chronic Pain
Patients Based on the Practice of Mindfulness Meditation.” General Hospital Psychiatry
4(1): 33–47.
Klatt, Maryanna, Karen Harpster, Emma Browne, Susan White, and Jane Case-Smith. 2013.
“Feasibility and Preliminary Outcomes for Move-Into-Learning: An Arts-based
Mindfulness Classroom Intervention.” The Journal of Positive Psychology 8(3): 233–
241. doi:10.1080/17439760.2013.779011.
Konu, Anita, and Matti Rimpela. 2002. “Well-being in Schools: A Conceptual Model.” Health
Promotion International 17(1): 79-87. doi:10.1093/heapro/17.1.79.
McQuaid, Michelle. 2012. “Creating Happy Schools.” In Wellbeing Happiness, edited by Terry
Robson, 36–41. Sydney: Universal Magazines.
Maher, Patrick. 1999. “A Review of ‘Traditional’ Aboriginal Health Beliefs.” Australian Journal
of Rural Health 7(4): 229–236. doi:10.1046/j.1440-1584.1999.00264.x.
Meadows, Donella H. 2008. Thinking in Systems: A Primer. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea
Green.
Meiklejohn, John, Catherine Phillips, M. Lee Freedman, Mary Lee Griffin, Gina Biegel, Andy
Roach, Jenny Frank et al. 2012. “Integrating Mindfulness Training into K-12 Education:
Fostering the Resilience of Teachers and Students.” Mindfulness 3(4): 291–307. doi:
10.1007/s12671-012-0094-5.
Mendelson, Tamar, Mark T. Greenberg, Jacinda K. Dariotis, Laura Feagans Gould, Brittany L.
Rhoades, and Phillip J. Leaf. 2010. “Feasibility and Preliminary Outcomes of a School-
Based Mindfulness Intervention for Urban Youth.” Journal of Abnormal Child
Psychology 38(7): 985–994. doi:10.1007/s10802-010-9418-x.
Miller, James W. 2005. “Wellness: The History and Development of a Concept.” Spektrum
Freizeit 1: 84–102.
Monshat, Kaveh, Belinda Khong, Craig Hassed, Dianne Vella-Brodrick, Jacolyn Norrish, Jane
Burns, and Helen Herrman. 2012. “ ‘A Conscious Control Over Life and My Emotions:’
Mindfulness Practice and Healthy Young People. A Qualitative Study.” The Journal of
Adolescent Health: Official Publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine.
Doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.09.008.
Monshat, Kaveh, Dianne Vella-Brodrick, Jane Burns, and Helen Herrman. 2011. “Mental Health
Promotion in the Internet Age: A Consultation with Australian Young People to Inform
the Design of an Online Mindfulness Training Programme.” Health Promotion
International 27(2): 177–186. doi:10.1093/heapro/dar017.
Myers, Jane E., and Thomas J. Sweeney. 2008. “Wellness Counseling: The Evidence Base for
Best Practice.” Journal of Counseling & Development 86(4): 482–493. doi:10.1002/
j.1556-6678.2008.tb00536.x.


 ALBRECHT: WELLNESS

Napoli, Maria, Paul R. Krech, and Lynn C. Holley. 2005. “Mindfulness Training for Elementary
School Students.” Journal of Applied School Psychology 21(1): 99–125. doi:10.1300/
J370v21n01_05.
Nash, Robyn, Beryl Meiklejohn, and Sandra Sacre. 2006. “The Yapunyah Project: Embedding
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Perspectives in the Nursing Curriculum.” 22(2):
296–316.
Ospina, Maria. 2009. Meditation Practices for Health State of the Research. No. 155. Darby, PA:
Diane Publishing.
Palombi, Barbara J. 1992. “Psychometric Properties of Wellness Instruments.” Journal of
Counselling & Development 71(2): 221–225.
Paterson, Charlotte, Charlotte Baarts, Laila Launsø, and Marja J. Verhoef. 2009. “Evaluating
Complex Health Interventions: A Critical Analysis of the ‘Outcomes’ Concept.” BMC
Complementary and Alternative Medicine 9(1): 18. doi:10.1186/1472-6882-9-18.
Peterson, Christopher. 2006. A Primer In Positive Psychology. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Plummer, Deborah M. 2012. Focusing and Calming Games for Children: Mindfulness Strategies
and Activities to Help Children to Relax, Concentrate and Take Control. London:
Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Pollard, Elizabeth L., and Lucy Davidson. 2001. Action Research in Family and Early
Childhood: Foundations for Child Well-being. New York: UNESCO Education Sector.
Poulin, Patricia A. 2009. “Mindfulness-based Wellness Education: A Longitudinal Evaluation
with Students in Initial Teacher Education.” http://hdl.handle.net/1807/26538.
Roscoe, Lauren J. 2009. “Wellness: A Review of Theory and Measurement for Counselors.”
Journal of Counseling & Development 87(2): 216–226.
Ryff, Carol D. 1989. “Happiness Is Everything, or Is It?” Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 57(6): 1069–1081.
Saarinen, Esa and Raimo P. Hämäläinen. 2010. “The Originality of Systems Intelligence.” In
Essays on Systems Intelligence, edited by Esa Saarinen and Raimo P. Hämäläinen, 9–28.
http://sal.aalto.fi/publications/pdf-files/rsaa10.pdf.
Schoeberlein, Deborah. with Suki Sheth. 2009. Mindful Teaching And Teaching Mindfulness: A
Guide For Anyone Who Teaches Anything. Somerville, MA: Wisdom Publications.
Schonert-Reichl, Kimberly A., and Molly Stewart Lawlor. 2010. “The Effects of a Mindfulness-
Based Education Program on Pre- and Early Adolescents’ Well-being and Social and
Emotional Competence.” Mindfulness 1(3): 137–151. doi:10.1007/s12671-010-0011-8.
Shapiro, Shauna L., Doug Oman, Carl E. Thoresen, Thomas G. Plante, and Tim Flinders. 2008.
“Cultivating Mindfulness: Effects on Well-being.” Journal of Clinical Psychology
64(7): 840–862. doi:10.1002/jclp.20491.
Singh, Nirbhay N., Giulio E. Lancioni, Subhashini D. Singh Joy, Alan S. W. Winton, Mohamed
Sabaawi, Robert G. Wahler, and Judy Singh. 2007. “Adolescents With Conduct
Disorder Can Be Mindful of Their Aggressive Behavior.” Journal of Emotional and
Behavioral Disorders 15(1): 56–63.
Soloway, Geoffrey B. 2011. “Preparing Teacher Candidates for the Present: Exploring the Praxis
of Mindfulness Training in Teacher Education.” PhD diss., University of Toronto.
http://hdl.handle.net/1807/31943.
State Government Victoria. Department of Education and Early Child Development. 2009.
“Victorian Early Years Learning and Development Framework: For Children from Birth
to Eight Years.” http://www.education.vic.gov.au/Documents/childhood/providers/
edcare/veyldframework.pdf.
Tan, Lucy B., and Graham Martin. 2012. “Mind Full or Mindful: A Report on Mindfulness and
Psychological Health in Healthy Adolescents.” International Journal of Adolescence
and Youth ahead-of-print 1–11. doi:10.1080/02673843.2012.709174.


THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH, WELLNESS, AND SOCIETY

Teasdale, John D., and Michael Chaskaslson. 2013. “How Does Mindfulness Transform
Suffering? The Nature and Origins of Dukkha.” In Mindfulness: Diverse Perspectives
on its Meaning, Origins and Applications, edited by Mark Williams and Jon Kabat-
Zinn, 89–102. New York, NY: Routledge.
The Center for Mindful Inquiry. 2013. “Certificate Program.” http://www.mindfulinquiry.org/
certificate/.
The State of South Australia. Department of Education and Children's Services. 2007. “DECS
Learner Wellbeing Framework for Birth to Year 12.” http://www.decd.sa.gov.au/
learnerwellbeing/files/links/link_72840.pdf.
Travis, John W., and Regina Ryan. 2004. Wellness Workbook: How to Achieve Enduring Health
and Vitality. 3rd ed. Berkley, CA: Celestial Arts.
Urban Brown, Jennifer, Nathaniel D. Osgood, and Patricia L. Mabry. 2011. “Developmental
Systems Science: Exploring the Application of Systems Science Methods to
Developmental Science Questions.” Research in Human Development 8(1): 1–25.
doi:10.1080/15427609.2011.549686.
Verhoef, Maria J., and Laura C. Vanderheyden. 2007. “Combining Qualitative Methods and
RCTs in CAM Intervention Research.” In Researching Complementary and Alternative
Medicine, edited by Jon Adams, 72–86. New York: Routledge.
Wall, Robert B. 2005. “Tai Chi and Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction in a Boston Public
Middle School.” Journal of Pediatric Health 19(4): 230–237. doi:10.1016/j.pedhc.
2005.02.006.
White Santangelo, Laura. 2012. “Reducing Stress in School-age Girls Through Mindful Yoga.”
Journal of Pediatric Health 26(1): 45–56. doi:10.1016/j.pedhc.2011.01.002.
Willard, Christopher. 2010. Child's Mind: Mindfulness Practices to Help Our Children Be More
Focused, Calm, and Relaxed. Berkley, CA: Parallax Press.
Witmer, Melvin J., and Thomas J. Sweeney. 1992. “A Holistic Model for Wellness and
Prevention over the Life Span.” Journal of Counseling & Development 71(2):140–148.
Yager, Z. 2009. “Developing Wellbeing in First Year Pre-service Teachers: A Trial of a Personal
Approach to Professional Education.” Journal of Student Wellbeing 3(1): 52–72.
http://www.ojs.unisa.edu.au/index.php/JSW/article/view/419.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Nicole Albrecht: Course Coordinator, Health Sciences, RMIT University and Flinders
University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia


The International Journal of Health, Wellness and
Society offers an interdisciplinary forum for the
discussion of issues at the intersection of human
physiology and the social life conditions. It is a focal
point for scholarly and practice-based discussion in
a time of growing public and research awareness of
the relations between health and social well-being.
The concept of “health and wellness” impacts all
members of society, whether at a personal level in the
positive senses of life-satisfaction and exhilaration,
or problematically through the cost and availability of
remedial healthcare. Contributions to the journal range
from broad scientific, sociological, philosophical and
policy explorations, to detailed studies of particular
physiological and social dynamics.

As well as papers of a traditional scholarly type, this

journal invites case studies that take the form of
presentations of practice—including documentation of
socially-engaged practices and exegeses analyzing the
effects of those practices.

The International Journal of Health, Wellness and

Society is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal.

ISSN 2156-8960