Lon Kilgore takes a look at the machine that produces fitness professionals, and he doesn’t like what he sees.
The problem with sport, exercise and fitness certifications is that they propose to supplant university education. The problem with sport, exercise and fitness university education is that they can.
Before you applaud or get your shotgun, no one really wins in this scenario—not the trainer, not the trainee.
It is an all-too-common occurrence for graduates in exercise science, health and fitness, kinesiology, human kinetics, physical education or any of the other programs in operation to leave university with no tangible fitness instruction or programming skills. They have only read about or been lectured on the concepts. Because the three-hours-of-lecture-per-week approach to education is financially viable, they might never have spent a single moment learning the practical aspects of teaching basic fitness skills such as running and lifting or might never have practiced putting them together into a coherent program that accomplishes a fitness goal.
This gap in educational provision and quality is only one issue affecting who can be considered an exercise professional. Public perception of what is needed to be a coach or fitness professional does not necessarily include a university education. Government perception of what is needed to be a coach or fitness professional does not necessarily include a university education. Further, legal opinion regarding who is a qualified exercise professional does not necessarily include a university education.
The only group who consider a university education to be a prerequisite for professionalism is university educators.