PEPonline
Professionalization
of
Exercise Physiologyonline
An
international electronic
journal
for exercise physiologists
ISSN
1099-5862
Vol
4 No 10 October 2001
|
ASEP:
A Call For Action
Tommy Boone, PhD, MPH, FASEP, EPC
Professor and Chair
Director, Exercise Physiology Laboratories
Department of Exercise Physiology
The College of St. Scholastica
Duluth, MN 55811
Things are different today from
years ago. People are different. They dress differently, and
many aren’t the same as they were even 5 years ago. New technology,
new books, and new thinking are changing everyday business and interaction
with others. Literally, everything has changed. Academics (to
a point), the way professionals think, the politics of organizations, the
research technologies, and the job market. Even more profound changes
lie ahead, perhaps, next week or next month and most certainly next year.
The future is here and neither yesterday’s thinking nor yesterday’s possibilities
will equip you with the skills to make it in today’s world.
The 21st century exercise physiologist
requires new rules for success and, therefore, new thinking is imperative.
The notion of not changing and adapting to our problems is amazingly a
hopelessly outdated idea. Solving problems, such as better jobs,
more financial stability, increased respect, and more creditability, begin
with new ideas not false assumptions that are inadequate. The good
old days are gone. Those days are now replaced by a set of shared
assumptions, although not unquestioned, that we need our own organization.
Such thinking is not inconsistent with established professions that have
nourished and provided for their members. It is a way of thinking
that may be considered radical, but nonetheless right because it is driven
by reasons of conscience not expediency and by integrity not by economics.
How else could we be here today if
it were not for the unwavering discipline of a few willing to think in
uncommon ways? Collectively, we find ourselves in the middle of what
has never been done before. Uncommon exercise physiologists
have embraced ASEP without apology. They understand that to live
it is to have passion without mere stubbornness. It takes courage
to give reality to uncommon behaviors. Personally, I am encouraged
by the following quote:
"Never cease to pursue the
opportunity to seek something different. Don’t be satisfied with
what you’re doing. Always try to seek a way and a method to improve upon
what you’re doing, even if it’s considered contrary to the traditions of
an Industry.” – Howard Marguleas
Change is never easy. Yet, change
is the one constant that bears down on everything. In time, the fear
of failure will pass and our feelings of disconnectedness will no longer
exist. Until then, we need academic ASEP members with the willingness
and perseverance to look at the academic problems before us. We need
to be responsible for what we are doing. Perhaps, a beginning is
to admit that exercise physiology is a separate and distinct academic major
in only a few colleges and universities. It is less distinct and
less organized in most academic institutions when it comes to producing
exercise physiologists (by academic title). The curriculum requires
serious assessment and important changes, and concentrations ought to be
academic majors. It is time that exercise physiology stops being
a subsidiary concentration “tied to the apron strings” of another academic
major. True curriculum reform consistent with our professional title
is imperative if the public sector is to understand what we do. Reform
begins with listening to your students, providing an outstanding academic
curriculum and service, developing critical thinking skills, looking for
and eliminating inefficiencies, and acting like team players. The
problem, clearly, is not in figuring out what to do. Rather the problem
is in finding the strength and courage to do what we know to be right.
If this plea is ignored, it is my
opinion that exercise physiology will continue to be shaped by conditions
only too obvious to many of us. In time, exercise physiology (outside
of the context of the PhD) will be replaced by the title “exercise professionals”
by organizations that already have a significant following. We know
many of them by such names as the:
-
American Academy of Health and Fitness
Professionals
-
Aerobic and Fitness Association of America
-
National College of Exercise Professionals
-
American Fitness Professionals and Associates
-
International Fitness Professionals
Association
-
International Association of Resistance
Trainers
-
Fitness Resource Associates
-
International Sports Sciences Association
-
National Fitness and Personal Training
association
-
National Strength and Conditioning Association
-
National Association for Fitness Certification
-
American Council on Exercise
-
American College of Sports Medicine,
and so forth.
ACSM is obviously the primary vehicle
for cross-disciplinary progress in sports medicine and exercise science.
Simply stated, as I have said many times, exercise science is not exercise
physiology. Rather, exercise science is a diverse field of study
that encompases many areas of inquiry, including sport psychologists, exercise
physiologists, biomechanists, physical educators, and kinesiologists.
Collectively, sports medicine refers to this diverse group of professionals
as cross-disciplinary exercise scientists. In other words, without
admitting it, ACSM states that exercise science is not exercise physiology
since it is an advocate of sports medicine and cross-disciplinary exercise
scientists (not sports medicine and exercise physiologists).
This is why exercise physiologists
need an independent professional organization. Professionalization
requires a separate and strong organization to guide the development of
national certification, state licensure, and curriculum reform. Members
of the organization can help construct a professional philosophy centered
directly on ‘what is exercise physiology?” and “what is its purpose in
the public sector?” The need for both is long overdue. We can
still do research and publish. Doing one does not preclude doing
the other, but our emphasis should be on bringing in more members into
ASEP, getting busy doing the business of ASEP and, in effect, getting into
overdrive. The time is right for us to teach who we are, to talk
openly with each other about the deeper and more significant concerns for
change. Careful analysis and delineation of our differences can give
rise to a systematic and coherent plan to resolve our most immediate concerns
and issues.
Exercise physiology is no longer
about the Harvard Fatigue Laboratory. While history is important.
It must be put aside to begin anew. Exercise physiology today is
about educational standards by which all college graduates can access jobs
in the public sector. Reality, viewed in this way, is an entirely
different exercise physiology. All of us need to get involved, particularly
the exercise physiology professors. It is indefensible that so many
of our college teachers are not members of ASEP. Each college teacher
here today, you have my highest respect. Now is the time to talk
about ASEP, and to introduce it to our students. They need to know
that the search for a meaningful direction for all of us has begun, and
yet an understanding of exactly the kind of business we are in still needs
careful study. Without a professional commitment on behalf
of the college professors, claims to professional status are empty noise.
The reality, of course, is that many
of us allow the sports medicine myth to confound and confuse us.
The belief that we can grow into a profession from within sports medicine
is not true. Other professional groups (such as the American
Society of Biomechanics (http://www.asb-biomech.org/),
the International Society of Exercise and Immunology (http://www.isei.de/),
the Association for the Advancement of Applied Sports Psychology (http://www.aaasponline.org/index2.html),
the National Athletic Trainer’s Association (http://www.nata.org/),
and the North American Association of Sports Management (http://www.nassm.com/),
and others) have known this for some time and have developed their own
professional organizations. It only takes a few seconds to find these
organizations on the Internet. Each is recognized and appreciated
for what it represents in the development of its members.
Personal integrity, conviction, and
the discipline to do what is right are essential to professional development.
So, why is it a problem that an exercise physiologist should disagree with
the sports medicine model? It shouldn’t be. In a world of conflict,
confusion, and effort towards making sense of life, disagreeing with colleagues
ought to be considered imperative if growth and new vision are important.
The privilege of disagreeing is just that, a privilege. Daring to
question anything is appropriate and necessary for an understanding of
what is right. The cloud of unknowing or simply not knowing what
is straight thinking is a problem. True knowledge and understanding
come from asking questions, constructing hypotheses, and going about the
steps of critical reflection. True knowledge comes from insight;
a moment in time when what has been standard thinking is questioned.
Greatness is awakened in each of us when truth within us calls out and
tells us what to do.
The ethics of the ASEP organization
and the moral responsibility of academic exercise physiologists are inseparable.
Our concerns with teaching, staying on track, making sure the content is
relevant, progressive, and understandable in our lectures are known to
all college teachers. But, our emphasis on the students as customers
is lacking and is in need of critical repair. The greatest gift that
we can give to our students (and their parents) is a job with security
and respect. Every PhD person wishes for the same. Placing
our students first or, at least, taking their problems seriously is more
important than any of us can imagine. It bears directly on the future
of what we are and how long we will continue doing it, especially since
the idea of continuing to mass-produce exercise physiologists, defined
by the PhD standard, is wrong, out-dated, and inherently inflexible because
the doctorate per se does not address the undergraduate’s lack of respect
and financial instability in the public sector.
In fact, the sheer volume of applicants
looking for so few jobs makes it seemingly impossible, and so even outstanding
graduates give in to the pressure by seeking certifications that are less
than ideal. Here, I’m referring to the “weekend warrior” certifications.
Most students understand the differences among the many Internet offerings,
but have become psychologically numb to the process if it helps to locate
a job. I’m not suggesting that all such certifications are meaningless,
but the threshold of “certification based on serious academics isn’t very
high. What is important, however, a profession cannot be built on
a poor foundation. All true professions have recognized academic
degrees, professional credentials, and accreditation guidelines.
The "Exercise Physiologist Certified"
(EPC) exam epitomizes the philosophy of ASEP and professionalism.
Central to this point is the ASEP accreditation guidelines. It seems
only logical that the faculty of academic programs that list “sports science
or exercise science” as a concentration in physical education (or kinesiology
or, perhaps, human performance) need answers to the following questions:
-
Do students have the professional credentials
to achieve success in exercise physiology?
-
Is the major in exercise science a major
in physical education or is it exercise physiology?
-
If a major in kinesiology with a concentration
in exercise science is interpreted as exercise physiology, is the view
correct and, if not, why is it allowed to persist?
-
If there are academic departments other
than exercise physiology academic coursework that is equal to an exercise
physiology degree, why aren’t the exercise physiologists in discussion
with their chairs, deans, and vice-presidents to re-name the academic degree?”
-
If exercise science is the preferred
concentration or degree, then who demands an accounting for and responsibility
for the graduates who refer to themselves as exercise physiologists?
It is time that we start asking these
questions. Furthermore, we need answers. My personal vision is that
exercise physiologists in the United States will do what is necessary to
emerge as a fully defined profession. However, to win we must begin.
Winning starts with beginning. Action is what unites every great
success. Action is what produces results. The ability to act
is our power, but only if we act!. We must take the types of action
we believe will create the greatest probability of producing the results
we desire. For example, in no particular order:
-
We need 10 new ASEP Student Chapters,
and at least 10 members should start a state association in their state.
-
Professors, we need you to commit to
offering the EPC exam at your institution during the upcoming months of
this year. We need at least 5 sites with your students as candidates.
-
Another major goal is to download the
ASEP Undergraduate Accreditation document and begin the process.
We need at least 10 professors who are willing to place their college or
university on the map by implementing the ASEP accreditation process.
Deans and chairs throughout the United States need to know about the ASEP
accreditation process.
-
And, yes, we need an increase in students
involved in ASEP and those who attend the ASEP meeting. Professors
can help with this just as many have done for years with other organizations.
-
All of us must start thinking and writing
about professionalism and publishing it in the PEPonline, but if just 10
of you would write 2 articles a year it would be making history.
-
Certainly, many of us are working in
places where exercise physiology issues surface without answers or even
with new answers, why not write to the Editor of the ASEPNewsletter, and
publish your thinking, especially if it stands even a 10% chance of helping
exercise physiology grow in professionalism.
-
It is now time to start the work towards
“licensure”. I have written the licensure bill for the state of Minnesota.
Naturally, it will require major revisions and a lot of work and commitment
to realize licensure.
-
We need a committee of dedicated individuals
who will look at our Vision, Goals and Purpose, Code of Ethics, Standards
of Professional Practice, and a variety of other documents to keep the
wording consistent with our intentions and basic beliefs.
-
There is the very important goal of
increased communication and sharing with our colleagues about ASEP.
We must get out the information about ASEP to the healthcare community,
particularly exercise physiology members of AACVPR.
-
ASEP needs a list of members who will
share their knowledge and expertise via email and the Internet about all
aspects of what we do and profess to know about athletes, health, fitness,
and rehabilitation.
In nutshell, we need you as an advocate
for ASEP. I do not have to tell you that there is no greatness without
passion. It’s passion that causes us to stay up late and get up early.
It’s passion that drives the actions of an organization. We need
to decide what we want, because that’s the only way we can expect to get
it. But, it is work that we must do together. It is hard work,
and it will cost us. There will be sacrifices, but there will be
rewards too. Nothing matters more than thinking, doing, and talking
about the impossible, and what we can do now for our students. We
will be measured by how we commit to both.
Copyright
©1997-2001 American Society of Exercise Physiologists. All Rights
Reserved.
ASEP
Table of Contents
Questions/comments
|
|