AMERICAN SOCIETY
OF EXERCISE PHYSIOLOGISTS
Founded, 1997

President’s Report
January 1999

I am sure that all of you are back in the routine of work now that our Christmas-New Year break is complete.  Several interesting developments have transpired since December that I would like to share with you.  In addition, I have completed letters to all committee members that clarify functions for 1999.  Copies of these letters are linked to this document, and will be revealed in the section concerning ASEP Committees.

1999 Annual Meeting
In December I completed a preliminary web page for the conference, along with a tentative schedule.  Tommy still needs to post this to the web-site, and of course this must be done soon so that members and non-members alike can be informed of the meeting dates, location, and format.  As with my comments from December, I encourage you to look at the schedule, and provide feedback to me on any changes (omissions or inclusions) you feel would improve the meeting.  You will see that I have no concurrent sessions scheduled as yet.  If we receive a volume of submissions, and appear to have enough registered participants, I can make alterations as needed.

To date I have had numerous requests for slots to give presentations on research and topic reviews. In addition, I have invited several speakers to present research, topic reviews, and interesting developments concerning state specific movements for the licensure of clinical exercise physiologists.  Consequently, I will be mailing formal invitations to for oral presentations during February.  To all the individuals I have spoken to, you will be receiving such a letter from me soon.

I have two interested candidates for the Key Note Address.  I am currently discussing the session with one candidate, and will base my decision on how well this person and the topic of the presentation coincide with the mission and functions of ASEP.  I know this has taken a long time to finalize, but I am hopeful of attaining a presenter that will not only reflect support to ASEP, but also be an attraction for new members and non-member participation in the meeting.

Journal of Exercise Physiologyonline
As was mentioned in the December report, Tommy and I have been working on a new/additional format for the journal.  It seems that there was unanimous approval of the Adobe Acrobat PDF file version to be offered as an additional format to the html presentation.  I like the idea of presenting both formats.  For example, the html format is better to read on-line, yet does not have the traditional features of manuscript referencing and flexibility in the insertion of figures and tables.  The Adobe Acrobat version is more difficult to read on-line, yet is formatted like a traditional journal and can be used to better recruit more manuscript submissions. Many of you liked the page numbering of the Adobe format, as well as the look.  I have proposed to Tommy that we post both formats to the website.  I will be formatting the Adobe versions, and Tommy will continue with the html version.  Although this adds to our time commitment to the journal, it seems that there is agreement among members that this is the best option to follow.

Finally, the Adobe Acrobat PDF file presented in the January issue of JEPonline seems to have been partially corrupted (note the poor figure clarity) by transmission via email.  The figures should not lose clarity as they did, and the text should not be as faded.  I will experiment with sending these documents to Tommy via FTP, and if this does not work, I will have to mail disks.  I am working with a student of mine to convert all previous manuscripts published in JEPonline to this new format.  I will provide these files to Tommy for posting to these past issues, and we will work in the order of January 1999 to April 1998.

I have half completed a manuscript concerning procedures for measuring VO₂max.  I have communicated with Joseph Weir, chair of the research committee, about this manuscript.  Joseph agreed to provide an initial review of this manuscript as an attempt at verifying the suitability of the research committee to review manuscripts recruited by ASEP to represent ASEP Procedures Recommendations or Position Statements.  To those individuals that I have recruited to write additional Procedures Recommendations, I will be in touch during February to consolidate this arrangement and provide whatever feedback and direction you need.

Letters to Other Organizations
I called Paul Thompson, ACSM President, during the second week of January as I had not received a reply to our letter of November, 1998.  I was able to reach Paul on this first attempt, and we had a very interesting conversation.  He apologized for how I had not received a reply letter from him, but mentioned that he immediately responded with a letter.  For whatever reasons, it did not reach me, so he FAXed a copy of the letter to me the following week.

As was indicated in the letter, Paul was very concerned that ASEP exists due to a conflict in “professional service” to exercise physiologists.  I was adamant in expressing the fact that the provision of professional services to any collection of individuals requires a professional organization that solely exists, functions, and consists of those professionals.  I argued that ACSM does not appear to be certifying nutritionists, physical therapists, athletic trainers, etc., so why does it see the need to function that way for exercise physiology?  He responded that exercise physiology is not represented by a professional organization that provides these services, and is not yet recognized by state licensure and third party insurance.  My next response is obvious, as I mentioned that ASEP is the professional organization for exercise physiologists, and that efforts are underway to provide certification, a scope of practice, and licensure.

Paul recognized that there are differences in how ACSM and ASEP view the professional environment in which we are both functioning, and that it would be best, no matter how much disagreement there might be in our positions and opinions, to meet to discuss ACSM, ASEP and exercise physiology.  I indicated that officials from ASEP are extremely interested in meeting with Paul and other ACSM officials.  For the last two weeks I have been trying to contact Paul once again to finalize a date and time for this meeting.  I would like to have this meeting during February, and hopefully this will happen and I will inform you of the discussions that took place in the next President’s Report.

ACSM’s Registered Clinical Exercise Physiologist (RCEP)
Most of you have probably heard by now that ACSM is publicizing the development of their RCEP certification.  This certification is meant to be more general that any of their other certifications, and is scheduled to be effective within 4 years.

The connection between such an advanced announcement of this new ACSM certification and ASEP’s announcement for the commencement of certification of exercise physiologists in October 1999 is difficult to overlook.  Obviously, the development of this new ACSM certification will be a major point of discussion in the pending meeting.  For example, ACSM knows that ASEP will be providing a professional certification, and we may even be well on the way to developing licensure in every state by the time the RCEP certification is operative.  Nevertheless, ACSM seems to be inherent in their efforts to certify academic and skill components that fall within the scope of practice of exercise physiologists.

The ASEP Board of Directors has yet to discuss the RCEP certification.  However, I made sure that I informed the national office of the development as soon as I became aware of the issue.  I will write a letter to the ACSM committee that is working on the RCEP certification, follow it with a phone call, and see what I can find out about the attitude within ACSM for this certification.

Other Organizations
As far as other organizational contacts are concerned, I have decided to first interact with ACSM before contacting AACVPR, APS, and the NSCA.  Nevertheless, I need to call Bill Herbert who has been instrumental in the development and promotion of the RCEP certification.  AS I know Bill personally from my days at Wake Forest, I hope that this conversation will be a positive one and lead to future interaction and cooperation between ASEP and AACVPR.

I have also written to exercise physiologists who are pursuing the development of licensure at the state level.  For example, such efforts are very advanced in the states of California, Kentucky, Georgia, Utah, Ohio, New Jersey, Maryland and Indiana, and as you all know, have been successful (or insulting depending on your view point) in state licensure of clinical exercise physiologists within Louisiana.  In past email correspondence with several of these individuals I have expressed concern that these efforts are being made outside of ASEP.  For example, ASEP’s presence as a professional organization, and ability to develop such things as a nation-wide scope of practice, program accreditation, and certification for all exercise physiologists should increase the potential for eventual success with state licensure.  These individuals have agreed that they should work within the structure of ASEP, and I will discuss with them in the future for how their efforts and accomplishments can be best supported by ASEP, and vice-versa.

Committee Functions
On January 26 I mailed letters to all committee members concerning their purpose, goals and objectives, and priorities for 1999.  These committees are involved in accreditation, certification, licensure, international issues, public education and job markets, research, regional societies, sponsors, standards, and women’s issues.  Click on these links to read each letter and identify what the committees will be working on this year.

Any interested members who are not on any committee, yet would like to work with a committee should contact me by email or phone, and I will arrange for their inclusion on one or more of the committees of their choice.

ASEP Student Representative Organizations
All members should view the UNM and CSS student chapter web pages linked to the ASEP table of contents.  I encourage all professional members associated with universities or colleges to promote their students to develop their own student chapter organizations.  To the non-university affiliated members, I suggest that you become associated with your closest academic institution that offers undergraduate or graduate degrees in exercise science/physiology and become professional members of that student organization.  Obviously, we do not presently have many student organizations, and it is probable that your closest institution does not have an ASEP student chapter.  However, your efforts at requesting and expressing the need for an ASEP student chapter may help generate these important components of professionalism.

Membership and Promotion of ASEP to all Exercise Physiologists
It is still my expectation that by October 1999 ASEP membership should exceed 1,000.

We all need to work at promoting ASEP to our colleagues and students.  In one of my responses to postings to the ASEP Forum I mentioned that all members must start to express to other organizations their support of ASEP, and the frustrations they feel for the current poor work conditions and professional respect for exercise physiologists.  Of course, suitable organizations to direct these frustrations to are ACSM, AACVPR, and APS.

I have drafted a letter to use, or build on, for members to write to other organizations.  I strongly suggest that individual members (student, BS., BEd., MS, MA, Ph.D, Ed.D. alike) should send this letter, and preferably more than just once, to these organizations. For example, the potential meeting between ACSM and ASEP will be tremendously supported if between now and the time of the meeting the president and other officials of ACSM receives hundreds of letters that express the need for ACSM to support ASEP.  Let us all direct our energy towards the organizations that might retard ASEP’s development, rather than continue to express our frustrations to each other.  I know that we all believe strongly that ASEP is needed by all exercise physiologists, but remember that we need no convincing, but too many other people still do!

Scope of Practice For ASEP Certified Exercise Physiologists
In my discussions with exercise physiologists the need for ASEP to develop a scope of practice keeps emerging as an immediate need.  For example, if exercise physiology does deserve to be a profession, then there must be a clearly identifiable and needed niche in the fitness, sports, allied health and clinical arenas.  Furthermore, exercise physiologists must be able to provide a level of service within this niche that no member of another professional entity can perform to the same needed level of competence.

I have completed a rough and incomplete first draft of a scope of practice for ASEP certified exercise physiologists.  I encourage every member to look at this draft.  I have charged the Licensure and Public Education and Job Market Committees to be the responsible individuals to develop this document.  Please provide your feedback to these committee members, and they in turn will communicate with me on future changes to this document.

Committee For the 2000 Annual Meeting
I have not received feedback yet on the need for a committee that concerns itself with the national meeting.  As always, I am open to your suggestions, so please let me know your thoughts.  Also, if there is a member who would like to chair this committee for the 2000 meeting, it would be good to start this process as soon as possible and learn from the obstacles I have confronted and will be sure to confront in the future.

International Issues
I am currently working on a manuscript of my talk at the conference last October.  In addition, I am including sections that concern ASEP’s mission to promote an international meeting, and to strengthen ties with organizations with Canada and other countries.

Well, that’s all for now.  I hope everybody has been able to recharge their batteries, and are ready for a productive January.

Robert Robergs, Ph.D., FASEP
President - ASEP