On Profession Building – Answering
the Tough Questions
Steven Jungbauer, MA, MBA, EPC,
FASEP, FAACVPR
Board Certified Exercise Physiologist
ALL GREAT ACCOMPLISHMENTS,
changes, and inventions were, at one time, contrary to popular belief.
So it seems appropriate that there is resistance on the part of exercise
physiologists to build a profession. Or does it? You see building a profession
or being a professional is not new or novel. "What constitutes a profession?"
and "What is a professional?" are questions with answers that are well
established. So I ask the question, "Why aren’t more exercise physiologists
interested in building their own profession and becoming professionals?
The model for a profession exists many times over. One only needs
to look at these professions to understand what underlying structure should
be in place for a profession. The first is self-governance followed by
academic accreditation, professional certification, and financial support
for the national body. I suppose you could even add a few more items but
let’s stick to basics.
Every profession has a national body
EXCLUSIVE to their profession. If you do not believe this, then show me
one profession that is governed by other professions. The issue of self-governance
alone should solve the debate over who is the national body for exercise
physiologists. Self-governance means that exercise physiologists oversee
their profession and their peers. This would exclude other professionals
from decision-making positions. Some “exercise physiologists” believe that
the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation
(AACVPR), American College of Sports
Medicine (ACSM), or the National Strength
and Conditioning Association (NSCA)
are their professional organizations. One only needs to examine the composition
of their board of directors to see that these are multidisciplinary organizations
and can not act as the governing body for any profession, including exercise
physiologists. Thus, the only organization that can act as the professional
body for exercise physiologists is the American Society of Exercise Physiologists
(ASEP).
Can you imagine an exercise physiologist
governing physical therapists, physicians, nurses, or respiratory therapists?
The answer is NO of course NOT! Yet “exercise physiologists” who view AACVPR,
ACSM or NSCA as their governing body let other professionals govern them.
What will it take to get the attention of these “exercise physiologists”?
The issue of academic accreditation
is short. To date only ASEP has accreditation of exercise physiology programs
in place and operating. After all these years, why is it that the youngest
of these national organizations has accreditation in place? The answer
here is quite simple. ASEP’s only mission is to build exercise physiology
into a profession. No other national organization has the mission to professionalize
exercise physiology.
It is estimated that 257 organizations
certify “exercise professionals”. The proliferation of these certifications,
most worthless to the professional development of exercise physiology,
has distracted exercise physiologists from developing their own professional
certification. Many of these certifications can be received without any
formal academic training in exercise physiology or even a related field.
As a result, almost anyone can be certified and, for certain, anyone can
take the title “exercise professional” and many do at the expense of the
emerging profession and the highly trained exercise physiologist. This
diminishes our professional standing in the public sector, reduces our
job opportunities, and cuts our wages. It is as simple as the economics
of supply and demand.
In contrast, the only recognized
certification for other professions (such as the medical doctor, nurse,
and physical therapist) comes from the respective national body for each.
Equally important, the certification for each profession is exclusive to
the academically prepared professionals from accredited institutions. It
is clear that exercise physiologists cannot sit for the physical therapy
examination or the nurses examination. So, since the standard is
obvious and consistent among professions, shouldn't the emerging exercise
physiology profession exclude anyone without an exercise physiology degree
from taking the "Exercise Physiologist Certified (EPC) examination? The
answer to the question is YES but it is not presently the right thing to
do, given the lack of academic consistency from one institution to the
next. This is not the case with most other professions and, to be
fair to exercise physiologists, most other professions have been working
at "professionlism" and "their professional status" for many decades.
What ASEP is doing is the best it can do at the present time. That
is, to help insure that the EPC candidates have taken the list of courses
described in the EPC
Manual before being allowed to sit for the examination.
Having read the proceeding paragraphs
one can conclude that exercise physiology has become a profession. Since
1997, ASEP has worked faster and harder than any organization to make this
profession a reality. But “exercise physiologists” need a wake up call
in addition to the Call
for Action registered in this months ASEPNewsletter.
You see, by definition there are only 67 Professional Exercise Physiologists
in the United States. These 67 Professional Exercise Physiologists are
academically prepared and Board
Certified. In addition, they financially support the national professional
organization for Exercise Physiologists.
This small number of Exercise Physiologists
is leading the way despite what might be the “popular belief" otherwise.
Others may say they are professional exercise physiologists, but they are
NOT. The failure of past “exercise physiologists” to organize as a profession
has resulted in the dilution of our profession into “exercise professionals”.
This can be reversed but it will require the admission of system failure.
And so, I answer my own opening question. Why aren’t more “exercise physiologists”
interested in building their own profession and becoming professionals?
They
don’t want to admit that they have spent countless hours heading in the
wrong direction and wasting valuable time and effort to achieve nothing
for the profession. It takes a strong professional to move against
current thinking and survive the criticism of their peers.
As an example, what would be your
answer to the following questions. They were presented in the Call
for Action. Could you go against the current thinking? Are you
able to withstand the criticism?
1. Do students have the
professional credentials to achieve success in exercise physiology?Answer:
Wake up academia! I am challenged to hire graduates of “exercise curriculums”
who do not need additional training to provide fitness assessments and
exercise prescription. Most students entering the exercise field are poorly
prepared by watered down academic programs which makes it difficult to
achieve success as exercise physiologists.
2. Is the major in exercise science
a major in physical education or is it exercise physiology? Answer:
Any major by a different name is not exercise physiology. You would not
rename a major in nursing to be patient care science. In my opinion, academic
institutions hide a watered down exercise physiology curriculum behind
a name change in an effort to lure students into the program. The end result
is poorly prepared students.
3. If a major in kinesiology with
a concentration in exercise science is interpreted as exercise physiology,
is the view correct and, if not, why is it allowed to persist? Answer:
This major and concentration should not be interpreted as a major in exercise
physiology because these students are not prepared with the knowledge or
skill to succeed in the work force as exercise physiologists.
4. If there are academic departments
other than exercise physiology academic coursework that is equal to an
exercise physiology degree, why aren’t the exercise physiologists in discussion
with their chairs, deans, and vice-presidents to re-name the academic degree?Answer:
Having come from academia, the wheels of change are stuck in the egos of
being different. And let’s face it that is the way we have always done
it.
5. If exercise science is the
preferred concentration or degree, then who demands an accounting for and
responsibility for the graduates who refer to themselves as exercise physiologists? Answer:
The only solutions for the failure of academia to change and become accredited
by ASEP will be governmental intervention and the licensure of exercise
physiologists. But then the proliferation of worthless exercise certifications
has already created a danger to consumers that will only be remedied by
regulation.
So, the question is, "Are you a Board Certified Exercise Physiologist or an exercise physiologist? Do you want
to become a professional? Are you content to let other professions
govern you and diminish your value and worth? Can you move against those
who prevent the professionalization of exercise physiology? Are you
willing to take a salary cut or find a new job? These are simple
choices in the light of the knowledge that exists relative to profession
building. The challenge is to use this knowledge to become wise and create
a formidable profession that we can all be proud to support. The choice
is yours. Choose wisely!
Copyright
©1997-2007
American Society of Exercise Physiologists All Rights
Reserved.