The EPC EXAM
ASEP contact page
Code of Ethics
ASEP Public Forum
Vol 5 No 8
The ASEPNewsletter is devoted to informative articles and news itmes about exercise physiology. It is a monthly magazine of news, opinions, exercise physiology professionals, and events that shape exercise physiology. While it contains views and opinions of the Editor who oversees the ASEP Internet web pages, visitors can have a voice as well. We welcome interested practitioners, researchers, and academicians to e-mail the Publisher their thoughts and ideas or respond directly online via the ASEP Public Forum.
The 4th ASEP National Meeting
From the Editor: Dave LaBore, MA, EPC
It is time for the August issue of the ASEPNewsletter. As I was thinking about what I should submit as Editor, it occurred to me that the words power, opportunity, and action have a lot to do with ASEP.
Power of a Movement
I just finished watching Lance Armstrong win his 3rd Tour de France in a row. What a machine. What I wouldn’t give to perform a max test on him. 450 watts of pure power. Just as experience and training catapulted Lance down the Champs Élysées, dedication, opportunity, and action can turn goals and dreams into reality.
Act or We Will be Acted Upon
In the July issue of PEPonline, Dr. William Simpson gave us the bottom line for our profession. Act or we will be acted upon. Although the effort will be tedious, we will benefit from it and our profession will grow stronger. Dr. Simpson reaffirms our knowledge that for us to succeed in our goals it must happen at the state level, and it will be worth it. Start now with a simple call or email to ASEP to start your state association. It is less work than you think.
Who Will Inspire Us
Perhaps, all of us would benefit from reading Tommy’s article Who Will Inspire Us in the June issue of PEPonline. If you should need more motivation, read Its Not About the Bike by Lance Armstrong.
Call for Comments
I know there are many of you who read all the material on the ASEP website each month and have great opinions of your own. You may have a special knowledge in an area the rest of us know little about or you can shed new light on an old subject. How about the new grads from last May and this August? You must be bursting with information to share. Submit your thoughts to PEPonline or write about them in the ASEP Public Forum. Whatever way you need to, but get your thoughts out so others may learn and be inspired.
Electronic Publishing: The National Office Perspective
Published in the March 2001 ASEPNewsletter
What is it? Electronic publishing! How does it compare with print-copy publications? These are just three questions. There are literally hundreds of unanswered questions about electronic publishing. Some of the questions arise from the tension between authors, publishers, and copyright material. Who owns the electronic manuscript? Other questions have to do with concerns by professors. They want to know if the electronic publications will help them get promotion and tenure.
There are answers to these questions, and all the questions yet to be asked will be answered. The mystery of the electronic era isn’t any more complicated than the times spent decades ago working through the development of hard-copy journals. After all, publishing is publishing and both forms require an author (or authors). The only thing that is different is the medium. What is the big deal? Electronic publishing is not an experiment. It is reality, and like all real jobs, it requires some work to see it through. Perhaps, it would be of some interest to know a few of the steps to publish an article in the PEPonline journal. The article is:
1. Written and saved in Microsoft Word.The transition from paper to electronic publishing presents several challenges for ASEP, as the publisher, and the Editor of PEPonline. The most significant challenge is the time involved creating the web page and linking the article to other online pages. Pagination is only possible with conversion of the Microsoft Word document to the pdf format. Is it worth it? You bet. Is it having an impact on the exercise physiology community? We hope so. It is one of the goals of the Board of Directors to publish articles for all exercise physiologists who need to make use of the information.
Check out HPCAREER.NET
Recently, I got into a conversation with a co-worker about our "title". After talking with him for several minutes, I suggested that he should read the following article. It was published in the ASEPNewsletter (Vol 2 No 1, September 1998).
In a Title?
Everything! Title is important. I am an exercise physiologist. I am not an exercise scientist. The academic area I work in is exercise physiology. It is not exercise science. The name of the department I Chair is the Department of Exercise Physiology. It is not the Department of Exercise Science. My students get either an undergraduate or a graduate degree in exercise physiology. My students graduate as exercise physiologists!
In the same building I teach, there are academic programs for nursing, physical therapy, occupational therapy, and so forth. At the completion of their course work, the students from these programs graduate into their respective professions. The nursing student, as an example, is a nurse. The physical therapy graduate is a physical therapist. Rightfully so, the academic specificity of each program sets the stage for both professional work and title.
What is in a title? Everything! I can't imagine my students would want to graduate from college with an academic major in exercise physiology to be told that they can not refer themselves as exercise physiologists, but rather exercise scientists (or worst yet, exercise specialists). Would you?
I suppose it is possible to totally miss the point of an academic major. Most people wouldn't think that would ever happen. Yet, I have had one such experience in recent months in which a graduate from my department was led to believe that h/she could not be an exercise physiologist without a doctorate degree. Many people who tend to believe such nonsense have PhDs! They worked hard for the degree and, therefore, unless everyone else walks the same walk, they can not be one of them.
When I look back at the courses I took at the PhD level, I can appreciate that undergraduates who are in an academic exercise physiology major are taking courses very similar to my graduate work. This point is especially true if the exercise physiology professors are doing their job. Therefore, in short, one could understand that certain undergraduate students have the right to refer to themselves as exercise physiologists (even if they have not published one article). Why? Because publishing per se, while important, does not make an exercise physiologist. Moreover, there are many exercise physiologists who do not publish!
Bear in mind that I understand the difference between an undergraduate degree and a graduate degree. Clearly, there are differences between the two which isn't the issue in this paper. The point is my students are required to take the following core courses: kinesiology, biomechanics, physiological assessment, cardiac rehabilitation, exercise prescription, ECG/stress testing, advanced exercise physiology, sports nutrition, psychophysiology and so forth. Depending upon their specialization in the exercise physiology major (athletic training, sports psychology, research, sports management), they are required to take additional courses. They are also required to do an internship in three of the four options.
In addition to taking a significant number of exercise physiology courses, the students are responsible for paying college tuition in the amount of $60,000 or $70,000. Naturally, after graduation, the students are required to start paying for the loans, which is even higher than the amount indicated because of additional college expenses and loans!
What is in a title? Everything from money to pride. It defines the person and, in many cases, it is the person. For example, I have been an exercise physiologist since I completed the PhD from Florida State under the mentorship of Dr. Ron Byrd (an exercise physiologist). I stopped being a physical educator in 1971. It is amazing to me that I'm still explaining this point to other educators. I can still remember a colleague at a previous university who was determined to convince me that I was a physical educator. Why? Well, because my undergraduate and master's degrees were in health and physical education.
I can only imagine how the reader may view such an idea. It doesn't make sense to me. Rather, as a person gets more or different degrees, that person has a right to the new academics titles. In fact, although I haven't worked in public health since earning the Master of Public Health (MPH) degree, I have the right to refer to myself as a public health professional. By the same token, when I finish the Master of Arts degree in Management, I have the academic right to the professional title and all that it defines (and so it is with my students who graduate as exercie physiologists).
Titles are important! They define who we are and what we do. The problem with exercise physiology as a career field is that unfortunately there isn't an academic history to examine and study (i.e., outside of contemporary version of the closure of the Harvard Fatigue Laboratory). Surely, someone other than I has figured out that we, as exercise physiologists, are (and have been) more than the idea of two decades of outstanding productivity from the "fatigue lab."
Exercise physiology has without question been influenced by the great men and women of the past. Their contributions to the scientific discovery of facts about human performance are tremendous. We owe them plenty because they created a window of opportunity where it did not exist. That doesn't mean, however, that it would not have been created at some point along the way. Physical educators have, for example, accomplished much of what physiologists and/or medical doctors set out to do decades ago. Our heritage is rightfully more in the hands of educators than doctors. It is more aligned with academic course work than laboratory experiences, although the latter is changing.
With the right course work and hands-on experiences (both practical and research), students can be academically prepared to be exercise physiologists. They should be academically prepared by exercise physiologists and not by medical, physiological, or biological science departments. The acquisition of knowledge and its organization for dissemination in college classrooms by exercise physiologists prepares the students for service in the profession of exercise physiology.
But, of course, not all academic programs are equal and, for the most part, there are significantly more "exercise science" programs than "exercise physiology." Not only are there problems with lack of consistency from one college program to the next, there are disagreements as to which courses should be included in such programs. To be sure, since there is a difference in what constitutes an academic degree versus an academic emphasis, programs that offer a degree in exercise physiology are (potentially) better than programs with an emphasis. Generally, therefore, students from academic programs with a major in kinesiology or human performance and an emphasis in exercise science (or even exercise physiology) are not as well prepared as students from departments with a degree in exercise physiology.
Even a degree in exercise science is not without problems because one doesn't know (without analyzing the course work) if the major (by title) is a new program of study or simply a change in the department name in which the old course work still remains in place. All one has to do is look up several colleges on the internet to verify this point.
The problem is multi-dimensional, but it shouldn't take from what has already evolved as a natural state of academic and professional development. Consequently, only academic exercise physiology programs graduate exercise physiologists. Programs by the name of exercise science can not graduate exercise physiologists no more so than an academic major in science can graduate a biologist.
The problem lies not with the academic exercise physiology programs, but instead with programs that do not offer a major in exercise physiology. Such programs should be updated with an adequate listing of course work. In some cases, many of the college instructors may require better academic training. This is not a new thought or criticism. The issue of quality instructors dates back for decades. Part of the problem is the lack of a professional organization to guide the development of the professional and, in particular, the development of the instructional courses in exercise physiology.
Not surprisingly, it is difficult to emphasize the importance of title without discussing the importance of qualified faculty to oversee rigorous requirements for exercise physiology students. In fact, it is now time more than ever before to address both issues at the undergraduate level and not just at the doctorate level. Exercise physiology is now more than only an in-depth academic preparation at the doctorate level. Graduate programs are important but now undergraduate programs that offer exercise physiology course work are important too.
Hence, the era has ended when only PhDs can be called exercise physiologists. With the ending of one era and the beginning of another era, there is justification in acknowledging an exercise physiologist by title. This approach is consistent with the earlier examples of being a nurse after earning an undergraduate degree in nursing.
Since physiology societies and sports medicine organizations have not worked to promote the identification and/or upgrade of the content of what constitutes an exercise physiology curriculum, it the responsibility of the exercise physiologists who teach in the academic settings to do so. However, college professors have been very slow in addressing this point. Exercise physiologists have joined the college ranks as professors, and have ended up teaching essentially the same three or four exercise physiology courses year after year. The professors have not addressed the issue of curriculum revision from an exercise physiologist's point of view. Essentially no one has addressed which courses should be taught, how they should taught, how much hands-on experiences or laboratory opportunities are required and so forth. Not until the organization of the American Society of Exercise Physiologists (ASEP) has there been an emphasis on academic development and consistency from one college to the next.
Given the lack of significant in-roads into communicating "what is what" -- exercise physiologists have thus done their work without considering the pitfalls of continuing without serious thought given to professionalism, program prerequisites, and cognate course requirements at all levels of the students' education. As a result, there is the notion that certification by sports medicine groups will legitimize the field. Surely, everyone realizes that any certification process that doesn't require a specific educational foundation (as in a college degree) is essentially useless. It is truly a bandage that will not work. It can not correct the problem of lack of attention paid to professionalism.
Because ASEP is the professional organization committed to the unity of exercise physiologists and the professionalization of exercise physiology, it will attract the attention of national and international thinkers. Many of these thinkers will embrace the move towards more academic programs (majors) in exercise physiology and less in exercise science. Specialization will gradually fall by the wayside as professionalization through better and more comprehensive course content and hands-on laboratory and internship opportunities become commonplace. The academic structure will be degree specific with professional expectations and outcomes. The Society will empower exercise physiologists thus enabling them to advance in the job market. It will embrace all aspects of exercise physiology, particularly the title of the profession.
is in a title? Everything! Exercise physiology defines who we are and what
we do. Today, we are a mix of exercise scientists and exercise physiologists.
In the near future, more of us will be exercise physiologists and less
exercise scientists. There is a difference. Interestingly, Charles Tipton
used the title "exercise physiology (ogists)" nearly 80 times in his paper
entitled, "Contemporary Exercise Physiology: Fifty Years...." I believe
the title "exercise science" was used one time in the 24 page paper. Also
important and of major significance is the title of the piece. Think about
it. Our power lies in our title as exercise physiologist!
Steven Jungbauer, MA, MBA, FAACVPRDefining the Exercise Physiologist
Introduces the "first-ever" ASEP Procedures Recommendation
Procedures Recommendation I: Accurate Assessment of Muscular Strength and