BooneThink

Behind the scenes of every academic program, there are faculty members who are responsible for teaching courses in the physical education major, others who teach courses in the athletic training major, and still others who teach courses in the exercise science major. As an example, consider the following department titles:
1.Sports Sciences
2.Human Performance
3.Health and Exercise Science
4.Physical Education and Exercise Science
5.Health and Human Performance
6.Kinesiology
7.Exercise and Sports Sciences
8.Human Movement
9.Movement Arts and Health
10.Kinesiology and Physical Education
11.Health Sciences, Health and Fitness Management
12.Sports Studies and Physical Education
13.Health, Wellness, and Physical Education
14.Health and Human Services
15.Exercise, Health, and Human Performance
16.Exercise and Athletic Training
17.Kinesiology and Exercise Science
18.Sports Sciences and Fitness
19.Physical Education, Wellness, and Sports Studies
20.Applied Physiology

In one analysis, out of nearly 900 department web sites, I found close to a 100 different department titles. Frankly, that is a problem. It demonstrates more than anything the lack of leadership, purpose, and sense of direction.

I’ve been a college teacher for nearly 40 years, If you were to ask me the question, “What has changed?” – I would say Nothing! The original mess, since physical education was challenged in the 60s for being a meaningless degree for athletes, has gotten worse. The issue of diverse department titles and quality of education has seldom been addressed.

Most of these departments are stuck in a phase of growth that no longer serves the students. Keeping things as they have been serves the department and the academic institution rather well. 150 to 300 student-majors represent a significant income and security, but it does relatively little to benefit the students in the long run.

In fact, just this week I was reminded of why ASEP exists. While getting some grocery items at Super One, the guy at the cash registered said: “You’re a teacher, right? I said ‘Yes.’ What do you teach? I’m an exercise physiologist. Oh, one of the other clerks just graduated as an exercise physiologist. I said, “That’s interesting. Where did he graduate? “From University of Wisconsin, in Superior”, he said. Then, I said, almost without thinking, “He isn’t an exercise physiologist.” He looked at me rather strange like, then, I said “He needs either an academic degree in exercise physiology or he must pass the EPC exam to earn the professional title, Exercise physiologist.” He just kept staring at me as I left the counter.

Transformative change is never easy. It takes time, resources, and the perseverance. Unfortunately, the entire exercise physiology community must be involved in solving their problems and, frankly, most academic EPs just don’t get it.
•They aren’t comfortable moving in the direction of the unknown on the promise that ASEP is the right course of action.
•And, it is clear that people like to remain connected to those they know, those who have taught them, those with who they are familiar, even at times of their own detriment. In other words, change is not a trivial process.

I am, after all, a product of years of failing to change. I performed academic functions entirely without knowing that I didn’t think differently because it was comfortable doing what others had done for years.

It wasn’t until I became a department chair that I realized neither more nor less academic titles, concentrations nor emphasis areas will help students from the inadequacies of the traditional ways of solving problems. There are simply too many false assumptions. For all intents and purposes, there is a lack of leadership today with respect “what is exercise physiology.”

Not surprisingly, exercise physiology is still defined as “acute and chronic adaptations to exercise training.” This thinking simply will not help us solve the challenges we now face. Instead, it requires radical rethinking of the most basic and foundational ways we view ourselves.

But, you may be thinking, “How can you say that?” First, there are essentially no other comparative academic departments with such in-house confusion about its purpose. For example, although most academic institutions graduate primarily physical educations majors, more often than not, they refer to the students as exercise science majors. My young friends, you are not living in ordinary times. The minds of many, if not most, academic exercise physiologists are closed to the fact that students majoring in academic programs that is essentially 90% a physical education major.

Calling it an exercise science major or even a concentration will not (cannot) make it an exercise physiology degree. That’s why students should not be encouraged to think of themselves as exercise physiologists when they graduate from an exercise science major or a kinesiology major. There are many other examples as well.

Second, what I’ve said is true despite the bursts of published papers by exercise physiologists in non-exercise physiology departments. Research by itself is not enough to bring about a change in awareness of the need for one’s own professional organization.

Academic exercise physiologists have lost sight of the distinction in professional titles that exist among other professions. They have also failed to appreciate that “exercise is medicine” and that exercise physiology at its core is a healthcare profession no different from PT, OT, or nursing.

There is no reason why exercise physiology should feed physical therapy programs, unless of course you already understand that exercise science is not a career-driven academic major.
Research is important and, in fact, it is an obvious requirement for being a profession. There are other requirements, too. One that is critical to any profession is the support of its professional organization. Others include a code of ethics, accreditation, and standards of practice.

The glue that holds every profession together is the sense of common identity that is tied to a common purpose. None of this exists within departments that embrace a failed sports medicine rhetoric; one that is infectious but misleading.

Graduating exercise scientists with an undergraduate degree is make-believe! Understandably, I don’t say this lightly. I’m not interested in offending anyone. My brain tells me that unless we change the way we think and talk about exercise physiology, many of us will continue to stumble and fall about.

This is not acceptable, given the expense of going to college today. No student should graduate to a fitness gym-job without medical benefits and a salary to pay the bills. Regardless of what some may think, I don’t believe being a “personal trainer” is the job most
parents hope for when their son or daughter graduates from college.

Also, in my opinion, exercise science, either as a degree or a concentration, is not an academic program that is pulling us into the future. It represents no-change from past thinking or, worst yet, change in the wrong direction. At least physical educators have a concrete connection to job opportunities. Exercise science is on a collision course with failure.

Note the following statements taken directly from several popular department web pages:
•The Exercise Science major prepares for work in clinical exercise physiology in hospital/clinical settings, as well as graduate school allied health programs such as occupational or physical therapy, exercise science or biomedical sciences.
•Exercise Scientists study the relationships among exercise participation, physical activity and human health and focus on the development and delivery of preventive and rehabilitative physical activity programs that promote health and prevent disease.
•An undergraduate degree in exercise science can prepare you for a broad range of careers such as clinical testing, fitness, performance enhancement, physical therapy, and cardiac rehabilitation.

As long as this kind of thinking goes unchallenged, students of exercise physiology degree programs end up experiencing similar problems in locating jobs because neither the faculty (in general) nor the public knows the difference between exercise science and exercise physiology.
Learning to think differently is imperative. It must be learned and it can be learned – and this, of course, is part of what this presentation is about. We can already see how other healthcare professions have changed (and have do so for decades) and how they continue to create new ways of thinking and leading.

We need an entirely new vision of exercise physiology, and that is exactly why ASEP was founded. However, the process of transforming how we think is not an easy process. In short, it means getting rid of the old to make room for the new!

The newly emerging language of:
•professionalism – not another weekend certification
•code of ethics – not greed or opinions
•standards of practice – not just more research without focus or even meaning
•accreditation with a purpose, not an agenda item for competitive reasons, and
•board certification is very different.

Nine out of 10 academic exercise physiologists aren’t prepared to rebel against the established way of thinking. They operate within the boundaries of programs defined by very little to no change since PE became ES in the 70s and 80s.

Wouldn’t it be impressive for an exercise physiologist to say to a department chair the following? “The exercise science major needs to be updated to an exercise physiology major. This can be done in accordance with the ASEP Accreditation Guidelines. I know it will take work and dedication, but it is the right thing to do. Is it going to take time, of course it will.”

Although we may share fundamentally different views on what I’ve said and what I’m about to say, the objective is rather simple: That is, why not do what is best for our students? Exercise physiology today is not as it was 20 or 40 years ago. It is not just about research or calling oneself a “physiologist” or even a “scientist.”

There is little doubt that the academic exercise physiologist’s job should be an unshakable commitment to the student’s education, not to writing another grant or attending a meeting (even this one), even though both are important.

These things are all part of the job of a being a college teacher, just as service is. The name of the game is giving power to our students so that they may take the best of what we can give them to realize their true potential and happiness. This, it seems to me, is intuitively and morally the only course of action.

Therefore, it is only right that exercise physiologists, particularly, the Board Certified Exercise Physiologists should come together and agree that the institutional thinking of the past is obsolete and that new ways of thinking about the profession should be taught, crafted, and implemented. I know I’ve said it to myself 100s of times, “Tommy, be strong, stay the course, after all, my students should have the same rights to a future in healthcare as the students of PT, OT, nursing, and dietetics.”

Understandably, it isn’t easy to “stay the course” but it is possible. I’ve taken risks and done things that some of my friends are not willing to do. The bottom line is that the old paradigm is dead and it should be buried and put away!

It is time to clean away the old thinking, and replace it with a new way to think about who we are and what we do. I imagine the new way might look something like this and, if you will, a recipe for coming together:
1.Fill the cooking pot with fresh 21st century ideas, especially the ones that speak to healthcare, sports training, and professionalism.
2.Fill the pot with more discussion among colleagues, more papers on the exercise physiologist’s code of ethics and standards of practice.
3.Stir in equal parts of focus on students and the role of a college degree in their future and financial well-being.
4.Bring to a boil and blend a liberal portion of research by exercise physiologists at all levels of education.
5.Fold and slip in precisely the right amounts of credibility, accountability, and legal responsibilities to clients and patients.
6.Simmer until smooth, thick, and strong, stirred with a common purpose driven by a shared vision and leadership.
7.Season with a dash of business courses and a pinch of courage to commit to building one’s own financial athletic and healthcare enterprise.
8.Let cool, then garnish with a topping of specialized certifications that further supports the EPC’s professional status and recognition.
9.Serve by teaching “professionalism” and self-worth as a course of study as one would teach exercise physiology.

To make this recipe work, to embrace a vision of the future that is compelling and inclusive for all, we must have the courage to do and say what we believe is right, rather than what is convenient or popular. Also, we must find ways to build partnerships based on shared aspirations.

Notice the emphasis on the word “we” – which is another way of saying “Self-Leadership.” Students (and especially those of you here today) need to take stock of this point because “leaders of the future” come from YOU. You must be willing to engage in self-change, and to bring into being what never existed before and couldn’t have been predicted based on the past.

As I was thinking of this meeting, I thought about asking students in particular, “What are you going to do to make the most of your life?” I thought, “Please God, let me find that person who will transcend the normal everyday way of thinking, who is going to break through, inspire us, challenge us 24/7/365, and call forth from all academic EPs the spirit of imagination. Bill Moyers said it best: “You know the spirit of which I speak. Memorable ideas sprang from it: “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”…”created equal”… “government of, by, and for the people”…”the only thing we have to fear is fear itself”…”I have a dream.”

Never have we been more in need of transformational changes to create and anticipate the future; changes that are profound both in behaviors and new competencies. Of course this will require massive amounts of collaboration with all the stakeholders involved so that there is broad-based acceptance and support of the ASEP vision and mission.

The logic is clear: Whatever your politics or academic background, my friends, we cannot go on under false pretenses that non-exercise physiology majors or concentrations have merit (especially when young people need our guidance when it comes to “what is exercise physiology”). It simply is immoral to ask students to go on paying hard earned tuition money for the wrong reasons.

And, frankly, we cannot win the battle as quickly as we should when our leaders don’t have the will or courage to ask everyone to sacrifice. Exercise science and whatever else it may be called needs fixing, because it is badly broken. Think it over: Those who graduate without a degree in exercise physiology aren’t sharing in the profits. Their incomes cannot keep up with costs and, therefore, because it’s harder and harder to figure out how to make ends meet, they go on to other fields of study. I believe this is the reason ASEP exists.

Please appreciate that challenging yourself to get out of your comfort zone is not easy. In fact, most can’t or will not do it. There are many kinds of risks in life: emotional, intellectual, and physical. The important ones are those that help you grow and express your values, especially in the service of others.

So, in summary, challenge the old assumptions, question the status quo, and develop new solutions, knowing there is no straight line to some future point. There is only learning along the way, adapting, and trusting your instincts.

When you do these things, you will be different, and your example will provide hope for others. After all, what you do defines who you are, what you stand for, and what you are willing to do to get what you want.