pro12

Academic programs are frequently under fire and subject to reform. Part of the reason is society's concern for excellence in academics. Another important factor, although not discussed a lot, has to do with the value of the program (i.e., does it allow for gainful employment). As the administrators of colleges and universities move into the 21st Century, they are likely to become more concerned about the latter reason. Why? The argument is "What is the value of a college education if you can't obtain a position paying enough to support a family?" In the past, whether students got a job or not didn't seem to have the impact it is having today. At today's tuition for college courses, parents (and students) expect a four-year education to set the stage for financial comfortableness if not success.

Loosely speaking, one might assume that everyone attending college expects not only to get a job but a really good one as well. Isn't that the reason people go to college? Perhaps, it isn't the only reason but some would aruge that it is the primary reason. Hence, educational courses in a given major are suppose to focus on subject matter and hands-on laboratory technologies relevant to a particular type of employment. The question might be raised, "What is the student's recourse at graduation when it is determined that a certain number of the required courses were not relevant or they lack adequate depth?" There is also the concern, although seldom raised in exercise science/physiology departments, "Are the instructors properly prepared to teach?"

Having a PhD degree does not mean that the instructors can teach. All too often this simple fact is overlooked. New teachers should be evaluated at regular intervals on such matters as subject content, verbal communication skills, use of different hands-on experiences and/or laboratory equipment. The multiplicity of instructional skills and technologiess required of high-level, innovative teachers are seldom systematically evaluated. There is instead a lot of rhetoric regarding the process. After observing the difficulties of new PhDs during their first years at the job, students are at-risk of not getting the best education because of what the instructor has yet to learn.

Fortunately, when the instructor, regardless of years at the job, has a deep commitment to students and a compassion, zeal, and personal determination for learning, the interaction between the two is a nurturing process. The instructor understands that he/she is in the classroom for the students, thus students don't pay to attend college to make the instructor's day. Such teachers also seem to understand their limitations, including not only academic but behavioral and programmatic concerns as well. They understand and demonstrate commitment to the job. They are willing to work, ask questions, and appreciate what they don't know. They realize that in a major way they are responsible for whether the students learn or fail to learn or think critically and reflective or fail to do so.

The willingness to work on behalf of students regardless of their academic backgrounds is a critical difference from typical academic settings. It would appear on occasion that some teachers prefer not to waste time with the academically disinterested (or challenged). They want to work with the best students; those who have demonstrated an interest in learning and doing. But, some of the students who fail today will be leaders at a later time, often when guided and/or influenced by a caring mentor, teacher, or friend. Tolerance and understanding on part of the teacher can open doors of opportunities for students who are still checking the water.

Students need adult support to draw them into a clear perspective about academics. Teachers can and should provide the emotional support in addition to the mental instructions. In short, acting as a counselor, confidant, and advisor are highly important supportive experiences that all teachers need (and parents have come to expect). Mere exposure to research techniques and the art of publishing aren't enough. Fostering sensibility and moral acuity are logical extensions of current thinking. Hence, exercise physiology professors must learn to work effectively with students, a resource often overlooked in their own development, as well as with other colleagues. They must strive to educate not only themselves but the students (particularly about professional concerns and issues) if everyone is to become successful.

Success, however, requires a restructuring of how students are assessed with less emphasis on multiple choice tests to encourage a more critical analysis of applied exercise physiology concepts and ideas. The development of alternative assessment strategies, including more emphasis on field experiences and internships -- hands-on practical types of work, clinical, and/or research -- are especially important adjuncts to traditional educational programs. There should be more innovative internship experiences for today's students. Internship placements should begin earlier not later during their academic program. Collaborative relationships should be built with local wellness, fitness, and rehabilitation centers and businesses to find ways to better prepare exercise physiologists. Students should have ongoing activities and opportunities to work on meaningful, useful, and enjoyable basic and applied projects to enhance, motivate, and authenticate the learning process.

College today is gradually changing. We must re-think our roles as college professors. In particular, we must get beyond the simplistic notion and dependency of importance built into classification of students. All students are important and deserve the same chance at becoming successful. Every student has a right to an education, and the right to be treated fairly. The idea today that a GRE score should keep a student from graduate school should be eliminated. It is out-dated and mis-used. The notion that, "If you don't want to think as I'm thinking, then you can leave before I throw you out." must change. American democracy states otherwise! Instead, why not encourage faculty-student friendships (if not a more personalized academic relationship between the teacher and the student) to bring about clear and straight thinking. Our students need less inflexibility and more open approaches to achieving success.

Our academic programs must move towards integrating into the community. More global awareness of how exercise physiologists benefit society is imperative. More organizational links between programs and the communities the students are expected to serve must become a deliberate concern of college teachers. Meetings must take place to highlight how academic programs serve the needs of students and thus society. These meetings should place emphasis on the new-professional exercise physiologist with the preparedness and motivation to design and implement health and fitness strategies to help the public sector meet the challenges of the 21st Century.

Meanwhile, exercise physiology professors must concentrate on their students education. The pressing need to do research and publish will take care of itself. If they don't, the severe shortcoming of too much emphasis on research will continue to mean for many students a valueless education. Reorganization and good common sense to educating students will help to avoid the continued disconnectedness with the students so that they can come into partnership with their students. Not only will the strength of the academic program be improved, but the profession as well will be enriched and secured.