Freedom to Think as an Exercise
Physiologist
Tommy
Boone, PhD, MPH, FASEP, EPC
Professor
and Chair
Department
of Exercise Physiology
The
College of St. Scholastica
Duluth, MN 55811
If you can be told what you can see or read... then it
follows that you can be told what to say or think. – Libervis Network [1]
YESTERDAY,
while driving home from a rather long day at the college, it hit me that
regardless of what my colleagues may think about my efforts to convince
exercise physiologists to join the American Society of Exercise Physiologists,
whatever else happens or is believed about the PEPonline journal, thank goodness that each of us still has the freedom to think
for ourselves. Understandably, this
topic may seem on the surface an obvious fact to some or even a waste of time
to others. Is it an obvious fact that
exercise physiologists have the freedom to think? Do they know that their colleagues expect them
to be independent thinkers? These are very important questions.
|
Everyone is believed to have the freedom to think, but do
they?
|
Just
recently, a prominent member of the Southeast Chapter of ACSM contacted the
2007 past-president of ASEP with the intent to persuade him to become a board
member of the regional chapter. This kind
of behavior demonstrates exactly where the American College
of Sports Medicine stands. The real
kicker is simply this: Where is it
written that exercise physiologists are not free to think and act on their own
behalf? Likewise, where is it written
that no one can think about exercise physiology from their perspective without
permission from members of other organizations?
This strikes at the heart of living in a democratic society, but it does
not guarantee freedom. Perhaps, this why
exercise physiologists often find themselves pulled in the direction of
something other than their own professional needs and interests. The result is one of serving the failed
rhetoric [2] of exercise science. It is
disappointing to say the least, especially since we are talking about the
freedom to think and act as exercise physiologists [3]. This is why the Exercise Physiologist's Credo is so important.
"I do not choose to be a
trainer, fitness instructor, technician, or a common exercise
practitioner. It is my right to be
uncommon – my right to be a professional exercise physiologist accountable to a
code of ethics and standards of practice.
I seek professionalism and credibility – not the easy road. I do not wish to be certified by non-exercise
physiology organizations that have nothing to do with the professional
development of exercise physiology. I
want to belong to the American Society of Exercise Physiologists. I want to be a member of the professional
team of exercise physiologists as healthcare professionals. I understand the importance of a professional
code of ethics, accreditation, board certification for exercise physiology
prepared candidates, and standards of professional practice. I refuse to give away exercise physiology to non-exercise
physiologists. I will not trade my
education or dignity for a non-exercise physiology major. I will never cower before any other person or
profession nor bend to any threat. It is
my heritage and right to stand apart from non-exercise physiologists. I am proud of my membership with the American
Society of Exercise Physiologists. I am
proud to be a healthcare professional. I
understand the importance of thinking and acting with integrity and credibility. All this is what it means to be an exercise
physiologist."
|
Leaders
are agents of change. They bring the
vision and context of change to the stakeholders so that the latter can
develop the content of change.
– Tim Porter-O'Grady and Kathy Malloch
|
Think
about the credo for a moment. What does
it mean to you? Can you imagine why it
is important to exercise physiologists?
Moreover, what have you done to improve the professionalism of exercise
physiology? What have you done to help
students locate better career opportunities at graduation? What have you done to ensure that the public
relates to exercise physiologists as credible healthcare professionals? Are their restrictions placed on your
thinking, your job, or your relationship with colleagues? If so, are the restrictions a violation of
your freedom as a citizen of the United States? Or, is it that you have instead placed
restrictions on yourself? If so, then,
you are the problem and not ACSM. That
would be important information to know. But,
since exercise physiologists appear not to be interested in anything other than
research, why is it they cannot or will not support their own professional
organization. Similarly, this concern
speaks to why they have very little expertise in curriculum development [4],
ethical thinking [5], and professionalism [6].
Members
of the ASEP organization may think that they are not subject to coercive forces
from competitors (and even colleagues), but this is not the case at all. There are forces that must be thought about
and dealt with accordingly. This is undoubtedly why some exercise physiologists
who would otherwise join ASEP have not.
They are not truly free to think or act independently of their earlier
sports medicine influence and peer pressures.
This is disturbing or, at least, it should be. In theory, one would like to believe that
academic exercise physiologists understand all too well the importance of their
freedom to think [7]. Is this true is
the question? How many times have you
heard negative comments about the ASEP organization? Now, ask yourself this question: how many
times have you heard some one within the ACSM organization speak negative
thoughts about it?
What
happened to intellectual civility?
Perhaps, reading the following definition [8] may help: "A commitment to take others
seriously as thinkers, to treat them as intellectual equals, to grant respect
and full attention to their views -- a commitment to persuade rather than to
browbeat. It is distinguished from intellectual rudeness: verbally
attacking others, dismissing them, stereotyping their views. Intellectual
civility is not a matter of mere courtesy but, instead arises from a sense that
communication itself requires honoring others' views and their capacity to
reason." Has
a non-ASEP exercise physiologist displayed rude behavior when you speak
passionately about ASEP? Why can't they
honor the views held by ASEP members?
These questions and others like them raise concerns. For example, while an exercise physiologists
my be free to hold negative opinions about ACSM, to what extent is he or she
likely to do so if no one has ever been encouraged (or even allowed) to do
so.
Further, how likely is the sports
medicine exercise physiologist going to disagree with the inertia of the
collective thinking [9] of colleagues if no one previously disagreed? In addition, if the political language of sports
medicine does not allow for a dissenting view or an idea like "the right
of exercise physiologists to belong to the ASEP organization," then how
easy will it be for exercise physiologists to develop their own thinking about
ASEP? In short, it should be clear that
limiting what academics and/or students think limits what they do. This point
should be clear, especially since it recognizes that, according to Cline [10],
"thoughts are products of our socialization and the information we receive
from others."
Control
your destiny . . . or somebody else will!
-
Jack Welch,
former CEO,
General Electric
|
However
it may sound to you, has it ever occurred to you that the existence of the
American Society of Exercise Physiologists is a freedom issue? Think about it. What is more freeing than the ability to
define who you are and what you do? This
is exactly what other healthcare professionals have done. Why exercise physiologists are slow to get
this point is packaged in the socialization process spoken of earlier. Speaking the truth about exercise science and
exercise physiology should be valued, not pushed aside [11]. In fact, Davis [12] concluded that, "people who
think for themselves (i.e., positive, empowered people) are independent,
capable individuals who can achieve just about anything. People who allow societal norms or other
people to do their thinking for them (i.e., negative thinkers) quickly become
dependent and unable to move forward in their lives." In other words, it is obvious (or it should
be) that freedom itself is subject to what different people believe is possible
for them. Not everyone has the same
freedoms, given their restrictions in one form of another.
But,
the exercise physiologist may say, "There is a risk to speaking
out." Yes, there is a risk. It is not imagined. It is real, and it has consequences. Yet, isn't that, as Lyon
[13] points out, "that’s the price of freedom, I think." To surrender our individual and/or collective
free will to decide our own future as exercise physiologists makes no sense at
all. All those who have come before us
know this is the truth. Hence, without
the right of every exercise physiologist to think for him- or herself, to
question "what is" and "what has always been" – there is no
freedom. Everybody loses without the freedom
to think clearly and to act in accordance with one's desires. Exercise physiologists, therefore, must live
their right to be free to think so they will always know exactly what they are
doing and why. If you are interested in
"your right" to speak out, consider the following steps to doing so:
- Develop a consistent and clear vision of what
the future of exercise physiology should be. Your vision is what you believe it should
be. Forget what others believe you
should think.
- Eliminate the thinking that fails to make
sense. Keep your mind on the
stakeholders, the students.
- Act on your decision to maximize the benefits to
you, students, and the profession.
- Avoid getting impatient, upset, or
frustrated. Stay the course (i.e.,
never, never, never give up).
- Chose your friends and colleagues
carefully.
- Join the ASEP organization and support the
efforts to define exercise physiology as a healthcare profession (after,
exercise is medicine).
- Write down your thoughts, ideas, and dreams
about what is exercise physiology and who is an exercise
physiologist.
- Ask yourself this question, "What can or
should I be doing on behalf of the professionalism of exercise physiology?"
- Remember what the novelist William Golding [14] wrote
nearly half century ago, "The highest level of thinker is one who not
only sees where others have gone astray but also reaches out to them in an
effort to build, together, something helpful."
- Focus on the positive and give yourself the
freedom to make mistakes and, yet accept the fact that your efforts are
helping others to live a better life.
As
with any new ideas and transitions, there will always be those who refuse to
change. New paradigms are uncomfortable
and a lot of work. Not everyone is
willing to deal with the anxiety and the differences of opinion. Letting go of sports medicine is the
beginning and, then, becoming aligned with ASEP is essential for success of new
ideas. And, without a willingness to
commit to each person's right to think as he or she pleases, exercise
physiologists will only hurt each other and delay the success of the new
paradigm. Exercise physiologists must
avoid becoming divided by non-caring behaviors and/or the unwillingness to talk
straight and honest with each other.
Having
the freedom to think allows for acknowledgment of the past, however tied to
errors and mistakes among its successes, in light of the ASEP vision to realize
a future with credibility. No one is interested
in turning his or her back on the past or even suppressing it. ASEP leaders are interested in building on
the past. Yet, their minds and hearts
are set towards a new pathway with a clear direction based on the right to
exist as a healthcare professional. This
is also why exercise physiologists who think for themselves have no sacred
cows. That is, regardless of what has
been done in the past or who has been responsible for doing it, 21st century
exercise physiologists must be allowed the freedom to think about exercise
physiology as they see it. All areas of
exercise physiology must be open for discussion and examination.
Freedom
to think is required of every exercise physiologist, especially the college
professors. They must be ready to raise
questions, to engage in analysis and reflection, to nurture the profession, to
nurture the zest for knowledge, to nurture the ethical ideal, to nurture
professionalism, and the spirit of collective responsibility for the
educational welfare of their students [15].
Professors know that they must be critical thinkers about what is a
credible academic degree because students are not objects or subjects per
se. They are "students" with
the dream and hope of getting a good job after college so that they can make it
on their own. No amount of research, no
big laboratory, and no "just any" certification can pay the students'
bills or justify a college education. The
time is past when exercise physiology can rely on others to solve its
problems. The professional mandate is
clear:
- To develop a professional philosophy that frees
exercise physiologists to think on their own.
- To encourage commitment to the professionalism
of exercise physiology.
- To facilitate critical and innovative teaching
practices.
- To promote a caring and ethical dimension to
their work.
|
The illiterate of the 21st century
will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn,
unlearn, and relearn.
– Alvin Toffler
|
After all, as a college professor, academic freedom is
taught as a founding principle of higher education. It is believed to be absolutely imperative,
given that it ensures freedom [16] of "…inquiry, debate, and
communication, which are essential for learning and the pursuit of
knowledge." Faculty members have
the right to receive and impart information and, yes, the right to express
themselves freely. Freedom to think and
act as exercise physiologists is critical and indispensable, especially if
members of the professions are to evolve and be held accountable to their scope
and standards of practice.
As an exercise
physiologist, my biggest fear is that when power by size of an organization takes
over a person's freedom to think, only a slight memory of what is lost will be
left and, then, decisions are made on the basis of the bottom line, not
professionalism. This is a serious
problem for academics and their students.
And, unfortunately, the academic profession of exercise physiology has
done very little to promote a set of guiding principles which would govern the
professionalism of exercise physiology for those who will work outside of
academics. Only a few academics have
come to understand that the discovery of knowledge is inseparable from the need
for professionalism and accountability. For
example, Robergs [17] has demonstrated a distinctive commitment to ASEP and the
professional development of exercise physiology. His efforts are intense and constant
intellectual expressions of activity to benefit his students and exercise
physiology. As a student once remarked,
"His drive and passion for the right of exercise physiologists to their
own professional organization is impressive and contagious."
Also, the
following remarks by Thomasius [18] are consistent with the thinking of the
ASEP Board of Directors: "Make use
of freedom, when you must give your opinion, and let neither fear nor unjust
force hold you back from it. But grant this freedom also to others, who with
you are members of one body.…Teach truth freely and without fear and refute
errors indeed forcefully but with modesty and without bitterness. Do not become
angry that others, in accordance with their understanding, may teach from their
lecture platforms that which you hold to be erroneous, for they do nothing
other than what you are doing, and different opinions will remain among
scholars perhaps as long as the world shall stand."
My father was
born in 1890. As a lawyer, he engaged
his sons and daughters in numerous stories about the importance of
freedom. He used to say, "Freedom
to think must be nurtured." Also,
he would say, "The freedom of speech and the freedom to write and publish
must be encouraged." Similarly,
"accountability must be planned for and promoted." He was not alone in this thinking. The following professional organizations were
founded between 1864 and 1889 [19]:
- 1864 American Ophthalmological Society
- 1868 American
Otological Society
- 1875 American
Neurological Association
- 1876 American
Dermatological Association
- 1876 American Gynecological Society
- 1876 American Chemical Society
- 1879 American Laryngological Association
- 1880 American Surgical Association
- 1880 American Society of Chemical Engineers
- 1882 American Forestry Association
- 1883 American Society of Naturalists
- 1885 American Institute of Electrical Engineers
- 1887 American
Orthopedic Association
- 1888 American
Pediatric Society
- 1888 Geological Society of America
- 1888 National Statistical Assocation
- 1889 American
Physical Society
Bledstein [19] points out that in the 1880s,
historians, economists, political scientists, modern-language scholars and
teachers, and folklorists founded their own professional associations. They did so because a "professional
person" – that is, according to Bledstein [19], is defined by
"…technical competence, superior skill, and a high quality of
performance….embraced an ethic of service which taught that dedication to a
client's interest took precedence over personal profit…." Further, the author concludes that:
"The culture of professionalism
incarnated the radical idea of the independent democrat, a liberated person
seeking to free the power of nature within every worldly sphere, a
self-governing individual exercising his trained judgment in an open society."
[19]
For the same reasons, the physical therapists,
dietitians, physical educators, and occupational therapists founded their
professional organizations:
- 1861 National Institute of Physical Education
- 1885 National Association for the Advancement of
Physical Education
- 1885 American Association of Health, Physical
Education, Recreation, and Dance
- 1906 National Recreation Association
- 1917 American Dietetic Association
- 1917 American Occupational Therapy Association
- 1921 American Physical Therapy Association
- 1954 American
College of Sports
Medicine
- 1983 Aerobics and Fitness Association of America
- 1985 American Association of Cardiovascular and
Pulmonary Rehabilitation
- 1997 American
Society of Exercise Physiologists
|
Greatness doesn't depend on size.
– Jim Collins
|
Without pressing the point further, isn't it obvious
that exercise physiologists are significantly late in being listed among the
professional associations of America? Isn't it obvious that they are extremely new
to the change process, why professionalism is so important, and why they need
their own professional organization? Just
think physical educators have been organizing since 1861 and especially 1885
with the AAHPERD and, then, there is the ACSM organization that was founded in
1954. That is 43 years of work to
establish itself versus the 1997 founding of ASEP.
Frankly, respect means a lot of different
things. When one looks back on the fact
that the NIPE was founded in 1861 and other well-known organizations were
founded decades before ASEP, on a practical level, it is more than reasonable the
necessity to give respect to them. And,
since respect is very much like a ball bouncing, what is given is received
(i.e., action-reaction). Everyone knows
that respect is not something that can be demanded, and under no circumstances
are the ASEP leaders interested in demanding respect. But every organization should be respected
for what it represents.
Years ago a professor said, "The best way to
teach respect is to show respect."
When ASEP exercise physiologists experience respect, they know what it
feels like. They like the feeling just as other professionals do when they are
shown respect. Interestingly, this raises the question: Why is it the ASEP
exercise physiologists have not been shown the respect that is worthy of the
work they have done on behalf of exercise physiology? No doubt there are a variety of answers, but
the following represents four ways that members of other organizations can
communicate respect to ASEP members:
- Take ASEP
exercise physiologists seriously.
- Keep in mind
that ASEP exercise physiologists are dead serious about what they are doing.
- Treat ASEP
exercise physiologists the way you want to be treated.
- Recognize the
education and professional talents of ASEP exercise physiologists.
- Talking to ASEP
members is essential to understanding the ASEP vision.
|
What is critically important
to realize is that what we "hear" or listen to, determines
what we say, which in turn, determines our actions, which in
turn determine the results or the future.
-- Barbara J. Fittipaldi
|
The use of good professional manners is one of the
most important social skills that exercise physiologists can teach their
students. Good manners begin with
"respect for others." And,
while conflict is inevitable, why not "listen" to the membership of ASEP
and, then, acknowledge the importance of what they are doing for exercise
physiology? To a great extent, this
point is consistent with the line in Cool
Hand Luke: "What we have here
is a failure to communicate." Failure
to communicate is a big time problem among exercise physiologists.
It is ironic that professionals have trouble communicating
with each other. Clearly, it is always
the same. No one likes to change his or
her behavior just because another person or group says it must be changed. ASEP wants change, but ACSM members do
not. In fact, many do not even
acknowledge that (in particular) exercise science is a problem. They simply are not interested (for many
reasons) in working with the ASEP leadership.
Well, so be it then.
The believability
of ASEP as a professional organization founded specifically for the
professionalization of exercise physiology is self-evident. The
freedom to engage in steps to improve the professionalism of exercise
physiologists is a basic value of every American. It is akin to the freedom of conscience and
the freedom of ideas. Certainly, it is
important to honor the right of individuals to think as they please, regardless
of the view of others. Moreover, as a
United States Supreme Court Justice (Benjamin Cardozo) reasoned in Palko v. Connecticut [20]: "Freedom
of thought…is the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other
form of freedom." Obviously,
freedom to think is each person's right and each person's responsibility. Why not think about the following questions,
particularly as they relate to the evolving profession of exercise physiology?
- Have exercise
physiologists made a commitment to professionalism?
- Are exercise
physiologists willing to pay the price and do what is necessary for their
freedom to develop as professionals?
- When will
exercise physiologists support the ASEP organization as their professional
organization?
- What strategies
are in the works to encourage partnerships among exercise physiologists and
organizations?
ASEP leaders are
still learning the in and outs of organizational development and the change
process. No one person has all the
answers. Luke [21] points out the
following, which is absolutely imperative for all ASEP members: "The real key to strategic leadership
lies with each member of the organization from the top to the bottom. Everyone can and should become a champion of
strategy within their function or area of responsibility. If a company is to truly become or remain
competitive, it needs to get everyone into the strategic leadership game, each
person a strategic contributor. This means the organization needs more than
just one grand business strategy."
This is also why the freedom to think and act is critical to the
strategic success of the ASEP organization.
Hence, the 21st century question to ask exercise physiologists is:
How can you contribute the welfare
and credibility of the profession of exercise physiology?
|
The best way to predict the future
is to create it.
– Peter Drucker
|
Remember, it
is about your freedom to think and act.
Exercise physiology can only grow if you do something about it, if you
ask the right questions, and if you find the right answers. Right now, too many academics are not thinking
on behalf of the profession or its students.
Giving up one's right to think and/or to act accordingly is a very
dangerous thing. Why can't exercise
physiologists learn from the past and, as Wells [22] says, "…not be
imprisoned by it." Can't anyone get
it, the past way with sports medicine is has happened. Exercise physiologists must learn from it so
that they can make deliberate choices about their future as healthcare
professionals.
|
The greatest impediment to future
success is past success.
-- Tim Porter-O'Grady and Kathy
Malloch
|
As Clark [23] remarked
in 1997, "Do NOT believe in the old adage, "If it ain't broke, don't
fix it," for the people who do, go broke!" This adage is equally applicable to exercise
physiology. It is time to stop the
excuses. As can be expected, then, when
exercise physiologists stop doing so, their future will be entirely different from
their past and what it is today. And,
frankly, this goes back to why ASEP was founded in 1997. Preparing exercise
physiology students for the future will be much different from the past. The point of this paper is that exercise
physiologists are faced with a dilemma just beginning to be understood. It is nothing less than the necessary steps
taken by the ASEP leaders to improve upon the traditional educational curriculum.
The reality is that the ASEP accreditation guidelines
represent "the" means and the need to challenge the present-day
educational system. Also, there is the
need to identify a new professionalism vocabulary and credibility framework
that enables a coherent approach to dealing with the change process. Exercise physiologists can only make sense of
their dilemma (i.e., the freedom to think and act as an exercise physiologist)
if they stop being ignorant of the factors that are holding them back. And, exercise physiology can only make sense
if exercise physiologists look unflinchingly and honestly at the need for promoting
professionalism and what it means to the 21st century academic
institutions.
References