Exercise
Physiology Signs of Maturity
Tommy Boone, PhD,
MPH, FASEP, EPC
Professor and Chair
Department of Exercise Physiolgoy
College of St. Scholastica
Duluth, MN 55811
“Perhaps the greatest
sign of maturity is to reach the point in life when we embrace ourselves
– strengths and weaknesses alike – and acknowledge that we are all that
we have; that we have a right to a happy and productive life and the power
to change ourselves and our environment within realistic limitation.
In short, we are, each of us, entitled to be who we are and become what
we choose.” – Buscaglia, 1991, p. 7 (1)
Learning to be who we are and
feeling good about ourselves is not easy. We are threatened by language
from colleagues who confound our perceptions and beliefs. Yet, we
try, and try as we may, often times, more than we would like to admit,
our feelings mirror beliefs no longer valid. Even when we hear ourselves
saying we are okay and have the right to a happy and productive professional
life, our environment causes us to come up short of expressing our real
hopes and emotions.
The problem is a perplexing
one. It has been analyzed and talked about before. It is a
function of our relatively passive state of mind, individually and collectively.
We are not acting responsibly towards ourselves. However, we have
within our power to change not only who we are, but what we collectively
stand for. One way to do so is to learn how to think and to feel
right about ourselves. For example, imagine the power in behaving
as worthwhile professionals. That is, having a sense of accomplishment
and value about what we do translate into increased communication and relationship
with other each other.
As a matter of fact, we must
learn to take hold of our influence on our emerging profession. Our
very job depends on it. The key to doing so, that is, to committing
ourselves to an attitude and sense of positive well being is a condition
of the mind. Seldom have exercise physiologists encouraged other
exercise physiologists to take careful note and disclosure of personal
values, concerns, and goals that center directly on the professional development
of exercise physiology. Some would even consider it an invasion of
privacy. In fact, on some level, to think outside of the sports medicine
model is to risk damage to one’s reputation.
Taking the initiative is
not easy, and so many of us (college professors, in particular) remain
quiet. We continue to invest our energies into peripherally related
issues of exercise physiology. What gets left behind is the
notion that we are responsible for what happens to our students.
And, of course, no one wants to risk ridicule, criticism, and disagreement
with colleagues on behalf of the American Society of Exercise Physiologists
(ASEP). Clearly, the organization is different, if not, unpopular
for those who depend on other organizations for their guidance and development.
However, we risk something far more important if we do not take the initiative
to express our values and principles. Silence takes from our personal
and collective growth and autonomy. Silence keeps us from pursuing
the necessary changes that must be made to update our undergraduate academic
programs. It is important to make our concerns known because the
values of another organization should not be imposed on the student who
is interested in exercise physiology.
Who “owns” this problem?
Who believes that “the end justifies the means?” Pulling the plug
on the sports medicine myth is an act of love for exercise physiology.
The decision to act or to choose exercise physiology and not sports medicine
and exercise science is personal. It is based on our values and our
certainty that we have the right to our own professional organization and
agenda. An understanding of these values is often the pivotal decision-maker
in answering the first question. We own the problem. The facts
are clear that we are responsible for dealing with the ethical issues underlying
the extraordinary lack of professional development throughout our academic
programs of study. And, as to the second question, ASEP is justified
because of the concern both for the lack of change and development in the
“exercise physiology” curricula and the possible liability and legal implications
of continuing with less than a professional academic foundation
One sign of our maturity
is the initiative taken by ASEP Board of Directors in adopting a “Code
of Ethics” for exercise physiologists. Here again, there is evidence
of decades of silence that has diminished our own autonomy as a person
and as a professional. Even now, exercise physiologists who belong
to other organizations do so without a professional code of conduct to
help in clarifying exercise physiology issues or in offering moral support.
This fact is hard to believe, but it is true and very unfortunate since
it serves the authority of others and encourages their influence over us.
Unfortunate also because the leaders and decision-makers in exercise physiology
have chosen not to address the specificity of professional development
that a code would outline.
It is hard to imagine that
the PhD academic professor is willing to stay within the frame of mind
that a discipline is good enough. Settling for less than the true
value of what should be a profession simply does not make sense.
Yet, one gets the impression that the professor believes it is safer to
remain quiet. Not having a code that outlines the values, concerns,
and goals of professional work is incompatible with clear thinking.
Not taking the initiative to develop a statement to society that provides
direction for ethical decisions and behavior ought to raise eyebrows.
Academic professors ought to be held accountable for the lack of a code
outside of ASEP, particularly if they plan to not become ASEP members.
I suppose claiming ignorance of its value is better than the obvious lack
of time taken to address ethical issues and, therefore, the lack of an
initiative in collectively coming together to improve the image of exercise
physiology in the public sector.
Not only are they avoiding
doing the “right thing” – they are also identifying themselves as something
other than pure exercise physiologists. The idea of “pro-sports medicine”
or “pr-exercise science” or even “pro-kinesiology” is impregnated with
philosophic and programmatic problems. Time itself ought to have
resulted in the right thinking about our professional development.
But, for many, the gestational decades of no distinction between exercise
physiology and the dozens of other titles in the field have set the circumstances
by which we have in effect abandoned our original rights. Many of
us are also uninformed and too infused with the notion of what is popular
or what is common or even what is contemporary must be right. As
a result, it is interpreted as a tragedy of sorts to be pro-ASEP.
Tragedy or not, it is imperative that exercise physiologists of all ranks
and positions should take their turn in supporting the pro-ASEP movement.
They must learn to be vocal in championing the exercise physiologist’s
right to choose and promote the organization of choice. The idea
that some pro-sports medicine proponents view the ASEP leadership as having
disgraced exercise physiology is extremists, anti-exercise physiology,
and anti-professional. The idea is stupid for obvious reasons
From the beginning, the relationship
of ASEP and sports medicine could have been a win-win outcome. The
ASEP leadership tried to manage the conflict between the two organizations,
but the use of power by specific sports medicine personalities set up a
competition between the two by refusing the request of ASEP Board of Directors
to affiliate. With just a single breath of accommodation, the sports
medicine officials could have easily put concerns aside and let ASEP evolve
as an organization alongside sports medicine just as other organizations
have done so. But, that did not take place either for fear of being
viewed as giving in – thus a lose-win situation. What should have
occurred was a collaboration whereby the needs, feelings, and desires of
both parties are taken into account. With just a little re-examination,
this win-win solution could have resulted in a commitment to resolve the
conflict between the two organizations with both benefiting in the long
run.
Had the opportunity existed
for the members of both organizations to listen and communicate with each
other, the problem of placing blame and putting down the other would have
been replaced with negotiation and workable solutions. It does us
no good to continue with our differences except to fight for the right
to meet the expectations of our students, their families, and members of
the public sector. Part of that right is the ASEP development of
new academic models and increased teacher responsibility for providing
excellence. Over time, the quest for professional stature, the implementation
of ASEP academic accreditation standards, and the constant and relentless
pursuit of quality will define the differences between the two organizations
and the members that belong to each. Hence, it is important for leaders
of both organizations to demonstrate a willingness to give and receive
feedback, to brainstorm possibilities, and to be creative and flexible
in understanding abilities, resources, and policies.
While it is still commonplace
that anyone can say they are an exercise physiologist, there are signs
of maturity suggesting that this is changing. Just within this year,
the Standards of Professional Practice have defined the exercise physiologist
as either an individual with national certification from ASEP or who holds
the doctorate degree. While the Standards await final approval from
the Board of Directors, it likely that the written document will be supported.
The Board will very likely consider that either is an acceptable credential
that indicates a certain level of education has been obtained, thus signifying
a certain level of excellence in performance.
The “Exercise Physiologist
Certified” exam is a distinct sign of maturity. It reflects a shift
in thinking and practice towards new graduates. Therefore, the question
ought not be “Which organization I should join?” but rather “Why aren’t
I a member of The Professional Organization of Exercise Physiologists –
ASEP?” Another sign of maturity is the willingness of ASEP members,
particularly Dr. Dale Wagner, who helped draft the Undergraduate Accreditation
Guidelines. Other important signs of maturity are the dozens of PhD
college teachers who are members of ASEP. Their membership continues
to change the image of exercise physiology as well as the social process
required of professionalism. They are helping students understand
that exercise physiology is intellectual with practical applications and
hands-on techniques; all motivated for the good of society.
We will see further refinement
and application of exercise physiology with the maturity of all exercise
physiologists and soon, then, articles like this one will not be necessary.
We will not need to spend our time debating sports medicine. Instead,
we will concentrate on the future. Until then, what is the difference
between the person who joins ASEP and the person who does not? According
to Thomas Kuhn (2), “He must…have the faith that the
new paradigm will succeed….knowing only that the older paradigm has failed….”
Kuhn is saying that “faith” and “intuition” are the guides to embracing
a new paradigm. ASEP is the paradigm shift that has changed the rules
of applied physiology. Because sports medicine cannot be the organization
of exercise physiologists, it is a mistake. Things happen for a reason.
If we can learn to discern the “why” – then we will be able to shape our
own future.
Fortunately, the process
has finally begun. In just 4 years, through extraordinary effort
by members of ASEP, exercise physiology is fundamentally changed forever.
The work and the lessons learn have not gone unnoticed. The new “model”
of how exercise physiology should be perceived, thought of, and valued
is explicitly defined by ASEP in its Standards of Professional Practice.
Thus, the new paradigm has its own set of rules and regulations written
for exercise physiologists by exercise physiologists. The framework
of understanding the emerging profession and explaining to students and
others that success is possible at all academic levels is a new paradigm
shift with new rules with significant changes in solving problems.
As expected, the new exercise
physiology has put everyone else who embraces sports medicine and exercise
science at great risk. And, of course, those at significant risk
are clearly the leaders of the old paradigm who stand to lose if they accept
ASEP. A decision at that level to change from the old to the new
views can only be made on faith that they will succeed. The new territory,
the new exercise physiology, is always risky to one’s reputation and position.
Even after talking to members of ASEP, it takes courage to act. But
look at the advantage of joining the new paradigm. Today, ASEP is
pioneering what exercise physiology ought to be. In time, it will
influence the world to cause it to catch up with the pioneering attitude
of American exercise physiologists.
ASEP is showing its own signs
of maturity, even at 4 years. So far, its members and their actions
have placed before the world a new look at what is possible, a new direction
illuminated by credentials, and a mindfulness of our students that ought
to be forever at the tip of our tongues. Regarding the latter, if
we do not learn to care, it is highly unlikely exercise physiology will
advance with quality and “continuous improvement”. The latter is
called kaizen in Japanese (3). It begins with the
notion that all exercise physiologists can and should be inventive and,
in essence, working everyday to improve the profession. Doing so
demonstrates a caring and a reflection on “What is exercise physiology
and what can I do to make it better?” vs. “How can I stand to benefit?”
Words like enthusiasm for the profession, commitment to students, innovation
and professionalism must replace promotion and position, tenure and security,
and publication and recognition.
The quest for excellence,
when guided by maturity, takes us outside of ourselves and beyond the “impossible”.
I have seen it. I believe it, and it has changed forever my view
of exercise physiology. I believe it will change yours, too.
Now is the time link new possibilities, new horizons. Think of the
long-term implications. For instances, our students could access
jobs with the same pay and respect other professionals get. The managers
and healthcare workers will acknowledge exercise physiologists on the same
equal footing as other healthcare employees. Corporate fitness, wellness
programs, rehabilitation centers, research institutes, stress testing laboratories,
prevention programs; all will have job opportunities for our students.
The key is combining flexible thinking, hard work, and innovation with
a purpose. For me, these are exciting times with positive images
and a vision truly like nothing we have ever seen before.
References
1. Buscaglia,
L. (1991). Born for love. Thorofare, NJ: Slack, Inc., p. 7.
2. Kuhn,
T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
3. Barker,
J.A. (1992). Paradigms: The business of discovering the future. New York,
NY: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.
Copyright
©1997-2001 American Society of Exercise Physiologists. All Rights
Reserved.
ASEP
Table of Contents
Questions/comments
