AMERICAN SOCIETY OF EXERCISE PHYSIOLOGISTS
Founded 1997
Annual Meeting, October 2-3, 1998
Summary of Events, Accomplishments and Recomendations

Robert A. Robergs, PhD, FASEP
ASEP President

The American Society of Exercise Physiologists (ASEP) was officially founded in January 1997. Shortly after this date, the president, Tommy Boone, PhD, MPH announced that the research journal of ASEP (Journal of Exercise Physiologyonline; JEPonline) was to be published in April 1998, that the first annual meeting of ASEP was to be in October 1998, and that ASEP was to work on issues of the professionalization of exercise physiology. Issues of professionalization were to include, but not be limited to, content of certification, course accreditation, and licensure.

It is now October 1998, and JEPonline is now in its third issue, ASEP did have its first national meeting on October 2-3, and details are already in writing for a proposed accreditation scheme for all undergraduate courses in exercise physiology. When combined with the success of the ASEP website, Tommy Boone's presidency of ASEP has been nothing more than miraculous. Tommy's efforts have catapulted ASEP into the forefront of the professionalization of the exercise sciences, and provided a momentum that is sure to assist the further development of ASEP and the professional recognition and function of all exercise physiologists.

As the new president of ASEP, I wanted to once again express my gratitude to Tommy Boone for his efforts over the past year, and for the many years prior to that when he was the lone voice in the wilderness speaking for all exercise physiologists, even when they could not hear his voice or recognize his wisdom. In addition, I wanted to summarize the events of the first national meeting for the recap of those who attended, for those who would have liked to be there but could not, and for those for whatever reason(s) decided that they did not want to attend.

The  agenda  for the meeting was previously posted to the website.

The first annual meeting of ASEP was attended by 97 individuals. Twenty-nine participants were undergraduate students in exercise physiology, 26 were exercise physiologists with a Bachelor of Arts/Science degree, 23 were exercise physiologists with a Master of Arts/Science degree, and 18 were PhD qualified exercise physiologists.

All in attendance were aware of the historical implications of the meeting. Being a part of the first ever meeting of exercise physiologists, organized by exercise physiologists, for exercise physiologists, was an inspiring experience. The common belief that exercise physiologists, even at the undergraduate level of training, deserve to be more recognized and respected for their importance in fitness, clinical disease diagnosis and rehabilitation, research, and academics was clearly expressed. Based on these beliefs, the content of the meeting fostered an openness of thought and commentary that resulted in major accomplishments and directives for future action.

The chair of the accreditation committee is Dale Wagner, PhD. Dale, along with seven other ASEP members ranging in qualifications (MSc to PhD) and professional duties (i.e., clinical exercise physiologists to small and large university based PhD professors), proposed a series of courses for an undergraduate degree in exercise physiology. The proposed curriculum represents the minimal qualifications that could be required for ASEP accreditation. It is divided into two parts:

(1) a "core science" component of prerequisite courses, and
(2) a "core exercise physiology" component.

The courses in the core science component of the proposed curriculum include:

• college algebra/trigonometry
• human anatomy/physiology and general/cell biology
• general chemistry
• physics
• introduction to computers

• lifetime/personal fitness
• first aid/CPR
• movement anatomy/kinesiology
• biomechanics
• exercise physiology (with hands-on laboratory experiences)
• exercise testing/prescription (with hands-on laboratory experiences)
• exercise biochemistry
• sports nutrition
• statistics/research design
• internship

Dale Wagner will provide a report of the Accreditation Committee proposal that will be presented in the website in the near future.

The chair of the certification committee is Tommy Boone. There are 12 other members of ASEP on the committee. Tommy clearly expressed the importance of striving towards the ability to certify exercise physiologists. The reasons for this need were based on the self-promoting benefits that this would provide to exercise physiologists in aspects of professional credibility, recognition, and employment. For example, certification is the most readily suitable path to increased recognition by other professions in the clinical and allied health areas, and provides the credibility that many academic programs are needing to justify their existence within their administrative structures.

The proposed requirements for ASEP national certification are posted in the ASEP website. Tommy proposed that certification should require:

• A minimum of a Bachelor of Arts or Science degree from an ASEP approved or accredited college or university.
• Satisfactory completion of courses/content identified by the accreditation committee (those listed in the website may need to be updated).
• Documentation of at least 400 hours of hands-on laboratory experiences (e.g., internships, field experiences, etc.) in an exercise physiology (or related) laboratory (e.g., exercise testing, research, kinesiology, cardiac rehabilitation, etc.) under the direction of an exercise physiologist (or exercise physiologist approved professional).
• A signed agreement to uphold the ASEP code of ethics and standards of professional conduct.
• Pass a 3-hour examination that consists of: (1) a 2-hour written examination to evaluate knowledge of the accredited courses/content; and (2) a 1-hour practical examination to evaluate hands-on laboratory skills and techniques.

Tommy has challenged himself as the chair of the certification committee to pursue the process towards a formal certification scheme to be ready by the next national meeting, tentatively scheduled for October 15-16, 1999.

The chair of the standards committee is Dr. Hermann-Josef Engals. Hermann reiterated the appropriateness of the content of the standards documents, originally conceived by Tommy Boone and available from the ASEP website. Hermann spoke of the need to maintain these standards, and that ASEP should progress with thoughtful consideration of our impact in the area of sports medicine and exercise science.

Hermann also identified the numerous definitions of exercise physiology that exist in published textbooks and monographs. A poignant point was that we need to form a clear statement, accompanied by pertinent explanation, of what exercise physiology is, and who exercise physiologists are. As most exercise physiologists believe that we are trained more than to service the clinical applications of exercise, this definition will be integral in delineating how ASEP functions for exercise physiologists. Similarly, clarifications for how exercise physiologists differ based on the terminal degree (BSc, Msc PhD) must also be resolved.

Finally, the topic of standards represents the umbrella under which progress towards course accreditation, certification, and licensure are developed. Thus, it was stressed that each of the committees working on these issues must remain in close contact and work as a team.

The chair of the committee for women in exercise physiology is Rachel Yeater, PhD. Although no formal presentation was made at the meeting, all participants were engaged in an open forum led by Tommy Boone with questions directed to a panel of five interested participants (Robert Robergs, PhD, Joseph Weir, PhD, Sharon Griffin, MSc, Paula Papanek, PhD, and Linda Frizzell, PhD).

The main realizations highlighted by this forum were that women in exercise physiology were probably underpaid compared to their male counterparts of equal training, work experience and productivity. In addition, despite average to above average representation in undergraduate and graduate programs in exercise science/physiology, our field remains male dominated. The male dominance in exercise physiology, especially at the PhD level, may or may not be fostering sex specific favoritism. However, what is disturbing is the fact that despite what appears to be excellent representation by females in graduate programs of exercise physiology, the majority of these women are not pursuing this academic excellence and professionalism into university employment, research, and public speaking.

The fact that this trend exists today needs to be approached with knowledge of what is reasonable to expect from women in exercise physiology, or any profession. Such knowledge is just not available at the present time, but is influenced by answers to questions such as:

• Will the "playing field" ever be equal between men and women given the sex-specific differences in social responsibilities that exist between men and women in our society (e.g., child bearing, child rearing, and home duties?
• Given these differences, what is a reasonable presence of women in professional employment and related duties?
• Should efforts be attempted at improving the assertiveness of our female graduate students?
• Is part of the female choice for not pursuing an academic profession in exercise physiology influenced more by her own needs or those imposed by peers and/or the society?

As I will discuss in my President's Report, perhaps this committee might venture into conducting research that can answer the questions raised above. These questions could form part of the survey/questionnaires used by the public education/job markets committee, which I detail below.

Currently, there is no chair of the committee for public education and job markets. As with "women's issues" no formal presentation was made at the meeting. However, all participants were engaged in an open forum led by Tommy Boone with questions directed to a panel of the same five interested participants of the women's issues forum.

The consensus among all who participated was that exercise physiologists are poorly understood by the public. People are unaware of our training, that there is a scientific body of knowledge about how exercise influences the human body, and that it was exercise physiologists who basically educated the medical profession for the many benefits regular exercise and physical activity provide for the human body. Clearly, exercise physiologists must strive to better educate the public as to who we are and how we can benefit them. Some solutions to this situation were the need to improve our connections to the media, improve our public speaking skills, increase the presence of our courses, students and laboratories in the local community, and continue to pursue connections to the fitness industry, sports, and medical professions.

I had mentioned how I have written letters to all television and radio stations within the Albuquerque area to stress the need to consult exercise physiologists when requiring information on any non-medical topic that involves exercise. Other recommendations that were also raised include notifying the media relations office of your institution to let them know that you are highly qualified to be involved in any media coverage at your institution that concerns exercise. If you are interviewed by lay magazine journalists preparing an article on an aspect of exercise, and decide to offer advice, make sure they give recognition to your exercise physiology training and employment status. If we all made these connections, then the overall impression of exercise physiologists within the public will dramatically improve.

Finally, it became very clear that we, as exercise physiologists, do not really know what happens to our undergraduate students after graduation. Similarly, many of our masters degree students also seem to "vanish into thin air" after graduation. This is a typical sign of our past disinterest in the employability of our students. Obviously, this has to change. As I will state in my President's Report for 1998-1999, an important function of this committee will be to make progress on research that attempts to identify what happens to our students after graduation. We need to know how many are successful in gaining employment in exercise physiology related duties, what is their starting salary, how long these jobs are retained, what are the attitudes towards their degree and what it has/has not provided for them, etc. Such information may also shed light on women's issues in exercise physiology. When we know this information, we will be able to act on resolving the negative aspects of the research, and reinforce the positive findings.

The chair of the regional societies committee is Don Diboll, PhD. As indicated in the website, the regional societies include the Pacific and Mountain, North Central, North Atlantic, and Southern states. There are currently ASEP members who are to function as the chair/facilitator of these regional societies, yet there is no process currently in place for how these regional societies are to function.

Don indicated that the most important function of these regional societies is to improve the recruitment of new members to ASEP, especially the students of exercise physiology. A student volunteer from the University of New Mexico already exists within the Pacific and Mountain Society. It was recommended that similar student representatives be formed at other institutions, with every member of ASEP who is from an academic institution being responsible for this development.

It was also proposed that each regional society should eventually develop their own website, linked to every other regional society and the national site of ASEP. The regional societies would be responsible for the content of their own site, but function within the guidelines of the national office of ASEP.

The chair of the international committee is myself, Robert Robergs, PhD. I presented a concise review of the national organizations within the USA that are more directly related to the profession of exercise physiology. These organizations included the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM), the National Strength and Conditioning Association (NSCA), IDEA, and the International Sports Sciences Association (ISSA). The most prominent international organizations included the International Federation of Sports Medicine, the Australian Association of Exercise and Sports Sciences, the Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology, the European College of Sports Sciences, Sports Science New Zealand, and the National Sports Medicine Institute of the United Kingdom.

The main interpretations of the study of these organizations was that:

• Within the USA there is a plethora of organizations devoted to catering to the specific needs of what are, in reality, sub-disciplines of exercise physiology.
• The professionalization of the exercise sciences in countries other than the USA is clearly being pursued outside of the umbrella of sports medicine (i.e., within separate exercise science organizations). This is true even when other countries have a sports medicine chapter affiliated with International Federation of Sports Medicine (FIMS).
• ASEP is the only organization in the world that is attempting to completely professionalize exercise physiology.
• Undergraduate students of exercise science in Australia and Europe already complete degrees that compare well with the increased standards that the ASEP accreditation committee proposed for adoption in the USA. The less developed and lower standards of average academic conditions of exercise physiology within the USA are very unique, and the functions of ASEP seem to be all the more needed to break this past tradition and provide the input of energy needed to revitalize both exercise science and exercise physiology in the USA.

This scenario is not necessarily bad for ASEP and exercise physiology. Exercise physiologists need to be heartened by the fact that even prior to ASEP, and without any concerted effort to recognize exercise physiologists, the fitness industry and clinical medicine fields have recognized employment opportunities for exercise physiologists. This has happened without any nationally approved and consistently taught course work for exercise physiologists within the USA, without post-graduate certification or licensure, and without a professional organization of exercise physiologists. Now that a professional organization exists for exercise physiologists (ASEP), increased communication with our closely allied professions (nutrition, physical therapy, nursing) and allied health service organizations (ACSM, NSCA, IDEA) should only improve the function and presence of exercise physiologists in today's society and the society of tomorrow.

As indicated earlier in this report, the agenda of the meeting also involved the presentation of original research. These presentations spanned topics of cardiac rehabilitation, resistance training, a long term (33 years) study of exercise training and aging, isokinetic muscle function testing, extremity loading during step exercise training, and health-fitness screening in a rural field setting. Such diversity was interesting, and a clear reflection of how the application of sound exercise physiology principles can be applied to many research settings.

The clear highlight of the research presentations was the talk by Frederick W. Kasch, PhD. As acknowledged by Dr. Donald W. Shaw (from East Carolina University), Frederick Kasch is a living legend in the world of exercise physiology and cardiac rehabilitation. Dr. Kasch indicated that he was experimenting with exercise rehabilitation from myocardial injury due to coronary atherosclerosis during the early 1960s - a time when bed rest was the primary therapy and exercise was viewed by the medical community to have no positive value to health and longevity. Dr Kasch took the presentation and verbal compliments in stride, and provided the lecture on his research and also a short synopsis of the development of exercise physiology during the last 50 years.