Accreditation verifies the credibility,
integrity, and quality of academic programs, thus ensuring students are
provided with knowledge and skills consistent with professional standards.
For ASEP, accreditation is also viewed as a method for distinguishing the
academic preparation of exercise physiologists from that of other professions.
In 1998, shortly after the
inception of ASEP, Dr. Dale Wagner and select members of this organization
began to develop an accreditation document. Their efforts resulted
in the creation of "The Guidelines for the Accreditation of Undergraduate
Programs in Exercise Physiology." This document outlines minimal
standards for educating students for a career in exercise physiology, including
general education coursework, a basic science core, an exercise physiology
core, and elective coursework (
1).
Basic Science Core Requirements
The basic science core establishes
a foundation of knowledge necessary to fully comprehend and appreciate
the complexities of more advanced coursework. The requirements within
the core include:
(a) completion of a minimum
of one course (worth 3 credits) in three of the four major sciences (biology,
chemistry, physics, and math);
(b) two laboratory courses; and
(c) substantial computer experience,
by way of a specific computer science course or incorporated into other
courses within the program.
Thus, the minimal requirement for the
basic science core is three courses with two labs worth a total of 11 credits.
Exercise Physiology Core Content
Areas
The exercise physiology core is
defined by specific content areas and learning objectives. The exercise
physiology core content areas are:
(a) first aid and CPR;
(b) movement anatomy or kinesiology;
(c) biomechanics;
(d) introductory exercise physiology;
(e) advanced exercise physiology;
(f) exercise physiology laboratory;
(g) exercise testing and prescription;
(h) exercise biochemistry;
(i) sports nutrition;
(j) statistics and research design;
and
(k) internship.
Each content area corresponds to a set
of learning objectives that provide structure to the information that is
taught within each content area. From the exercise physiology core
content areas a minimum of 24 credits is recommended.
Elective courses should be selected
to compliment required coursework and a student's career interests.
The ASEP accreditation document places no stipulations on what elective
courses should be offered.
Purpose of the Study
With this in mind, the purpose of
this research was to investigate the current state of exercise physiology
and related academic programs, such as exercise science, kinesiology, physical
education, and others. Emphasis was placed on determining how the
required coursework of schools with these various degree titles compares
to the ASEP educational standards, specifically the basic science core
and exercise physiology core.
Analysis of Colleges and Universities
The subject pool consisted of 77
colleges and universities with four-year degree programs in exercise physiology
or related titles. All schools were selected from the Directory of
Academic Programs (2) on the ASEP website. Table
1 presents a listing of the 20 different degrees offered by the
schools in this study. Table
2 presents the number of schools that meet the exercise physiology
core credit requirement.
For each school the total number
of credits offered in each exercise physiology core content area was determined.
Only courses that are required were eligible to be counted for credit.
Credit totals within each content area were not allowed to exceed the totals
specified in the accreditation document. Each content area was allowed
a maximum of 3 credits, except first aid and CPR, which allows for a maximum
of 2 credits. Counting of credits was done first to determine if
the minimum credit requirement for the exercise physiology core was met.
Of the 77 colleges and universities in this study, only 6 or less than
10% of the schools fulfilled the credit requirement for the exercise physiology
core.
Counting and distribution of credits
into corresponding content areas were also done to determine the total
number and percentage of content areas each school is compliant with. Table
3 represents the distribution of schools into categories by the
percentage of content areas met. Each category represents a 10% range
of compliance. The criterion for being compliant with a content area
involves requiring coursework, worth a minimum of 1 credit, within that
area.
The majority of the colleges and
universities in this study reside in the lower half of the percentage categories.
In fact, 42 of the 77 schools met less than 50% of the exercise physiology
core content areas. It is also important to note that no schools
met less than 9% or more than 90% of the content areas. We had expected
the number of colleges and universities in each category to be fairly equal,
however a chi-square test for goodness of fit demonstrates that there is
significant statistical difference in the distribution of schools across
categories.
Initially, we hypothesized that variation
in degree titles accounted for the unexpected placement of schools.
There are 20 different degree titles among the 77 schools in this study,
but only four schools offer a degree in exercise physiology. The
ASEP accreditation guidelines were created specifically for exercise physiology
degree programs and the schools with related degree titles would not necessarily
need to require the same coursework as schools with an exercise physiology
degree. Thus, we expected that the four schools with the exercise
physiology degree and possibly the 20 schools with the exercise science
degree would occupy the higher percentage categories and the remaining
schools, with related degrees, would fill in the lower percentage categories.
However, there were no statistical differences in the distribution of degree
titles.
The highest compliance category occupied
by an exercise physiology degree is the 60-69% category. Actually
two of the four programs with the exercise physiology degree occupy this
category. The other degree titles in the category, as presented in
Table
4, are exercise science (of which there are four), health fitness,
health and human development, and kinesiology (of which there are four).
These degrees required courses in as many or more of the content areas
as the four exercise physiology degree programs. In fact, 55% of
the programs with the exercise science degree, 43% of the programs with
the physical education degree, and 38% of the programs with the kinesiology
degree also met 60% or more of the content areas.
Table
5 and Table
6 represent the distribution of degree titles within the 70-79% and
80-89% category. The degree titles in the 70-79% category are:
(a) exercise science;
(b) exercise and health science;
(c) health and physical education;
(d) physical education; and
(e) kinesiology.
The degree titles in the 80-89% category
are:
(a) exercise science;
(b) kinesiology;
(c) nutrition and exercise science;
and
(d) physical education.
Again, these charts demonstrate that
there are programs with related degree titles that require courses in more
of the exercise physiology core content areas than the four exercise physiology
degrees.
With respect to the basic science
core, credits again were counted and distributed into subject areas.
Credits were used to determine if a school met or failed to meet the requirements
of the basic science core. Fifty-five of the 77 colleges and universities
fulfilled the basic science core requirements.
From these results there are two
important conclusions. First, the academic programs that have a degree
in exercise physiology do not meet the ASEP educational standards.
Instead of directly preparing students for a career in exercise physiology,
these programs may have been designed to supply students with the knowledge
needed to access certifications sponsored by other organizations.
These certifications, however, by definition, do not create exercise physiologists.
In fact, these certifications, which are sponsored by non-exercise physiology
organizations, do not require an academic degree in exercise physiology
to be eligible to take the exam.
The curriculum depicted in the ASEP
accreditation document was developed to prepare students for the Exercise
Physiologist Certified exam (3), the only national certification
created exclusively for exercise physiologists (indicating that an academic
degree or degree concentration in either exercise physiology or exercise
science is a requirement to eligible for the EPC exam). According
to the accreditation guidelines, the ASEP curriculum reflects the unique
professional practice and vision of exercise physiologists. Programs
that educate students for the many non-exercise physiology certifications
may not be adequate in preparation for a career in exercise physiology.
Table
7 and Table
8 provide information about the types of courses required by the 77
colleges and universities in this study. The table gives the percentage
of schools that fulfill each exercise physiology core content area.
Less than 50% of the schools offer coursework in first aid and CPR, advanced
exercise physiology, exercise physiology laboratory, exercise biochemistry,
sports nutrition, and internship. These are areas of study that are
essential to the education of exercise physiologists, but are lacking in
the curriculum of many programs preparing students for non-exercise physiology
certifications.
Secondly, there is no distinction
in the coursework required by schools with a degree in exercise physiology
and schools with a degree by a related title. Apparently, as programs
were created or adapted from more traditional programs to meet the needs
of students preparing for certifications by non-exercise physiology organizations,
there was no regulation of degree title or curriculum.
ASEP has taken responsibility for
regulating programs that prepare students for a career in exercise physiology.
The ASEP accreditation guidelines provide a framework for developing the
curriculum of exercise physiology programs and they reflect the coursework
that is required to be eligible for the EPC exam. These guidelines
not only establish consistency across all exercise physiology programs,
but they also create a curriculum that is unique to the exercise physiology
profession.
For many members of this organization,
the results of this study are very much expected. They have believed
for some time that the programs preparing exercise physiologists are inadequate
and that there is still more work to be done to complete the separation
from physical education and sports medicine. This study quantifies
the beliefs of those members. The results will be helpful in guiding
discussion within the accreditation committee. In conclusion, there are
two recommendations.
First, in regards
to the programs that offer the exercise physiology degree, but fall short
of meeting the ASEP guidelines, it will be necessary that the faculty take
a long look at the goals of their programs. If they wish for their
academic program to be an exercise physiology program, they need to make
the necessary adjustments to the curriculum. For some programs this
may be as simple as switching courses from the list of elective courses
to the list of required courses. This is true for many of the schools
in this study. They have courses available in most, if not all content
areas, but the courses are not required of the students to obtain the degree.
For other programs, this would require adding courses to those already
available.
Second, to those schools that
offer degrees with related titles, but also meet the accreditation requirements,
they might consider changing the name of the degree program to exercise
physiology. Since, at the present time, as written, the ASEP accreditation
process, is defined to accredit only a small percent of the undergraduate
programs with a an exercise physiology degree. It is further recommended
that the accreditation board reexamines the criteria for accreditation
to increase the likelihood of more interest on behalf of schools with related
degree titles. For a school to be eligible for accreditation, it
is reasonable that the same criteria used to sit for the EPC exam should
be used for accreditation. As an example, a school that has a kinesiology
degree with and exercise physiology or exercise science concentration and
otherwise meets the accreditation guidelines may be accredited. This
expansion of the criteria to be eligible for accreditation would further
the ASEP reach into modifying programs in the direction of professional
development.
References
1. American Society
of Exercise Physiologists. (2001). The Guidelines for the Accreditation
of Undergraduate Programs in Exercise Physiology. [Online].
http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/accredit.htm
2. American Society
of Exercise Physiologists. (2001). Directory of Academic Programs. [Online].
http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/graduate.htm
3. American society of Exercise Physiologists. (2001).
Exercise Physiologist Certified Manual. [Online]. http://www.asep.org/asep/asep/EPCManual.html
Copyright
©1997-2007
American Society of Exercise Physiologists All Rights
Reserved.