The American Academy of Personal Training

Part I : Childhood Physical Inactivity and Obesity Prevention

2009-11-23T16:36:00.000-08:00

This will be the first in a series of writings by Angela Corcoran.

Recent data from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association indicate that rates of childhood overweight and obesity are dramatically on the rise reaching at or above 30 percent in 30 states. In fact on August 17, 2009 the U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona, MD called it "the greatest threat to public health today killing more Americans than AIDS, all cancers and all accidents combined.". The major cause of overweight and obesity is poor nutrition and physical inactivity. Government based health promotion groups are being formed (such as the AMA Working Group on Managing Childhood Obesity) to evaluate the barriers leading to childhood inactivity. Many studies suggest that there is a need for pediatric providers to address barriers to physical activity with families and act as advocates for changes in the local community that support access to physical activity for all children.

One of the barriers for pediatric providers is incorporating the exercise professional into a network of competent and knowledgeable preventive care providers. Linking the physician to the exercise professional that is capable of providing preventive care will be contingent upon the exercise professional’s ability to acquire the knowledge and skills to effectively provide physical activity to children. Exercise professionals interested in working with this group of individuals need to clearly understand the exercise guidelines for children and suggest effective training strategies. In order to establish exercise guidelines for children, one must first understand how children acquire new motor skills (learn to exercise) and the physiological differences between an adult and child.

Why It's Important for Trainers to Write Programs

2009-10-30T07:10:00.000-07:00

Why It's Important for Trainers to Write Programs
Written by: Graeme Prue, AAPT BOSTON Faculty

When Angela Corcoran asked me to write an article regarding the importance of writing a 4-6 week program in advance of any training session, I had a lot of ideas but couldn’t decide where to start. I asked current and former students what they would like to read in regards to this particular article and what type of direction they would like to see it taken. As they started to give me feedback more questions arose and differing ideas and directions became apparent.

I still needed a good opening to the article that would catch people’s attention, when it suddenly occurred to me that what I had done was directly comparable to writing a program. Because I needed direction on the content I needed direct feedback from the people that were going to be reading it- you could call this part of the article my assessment. Most clients will indicate that they want to lose fat and get stronger. However, if we do not assess their strength and their body fat percentage how do we know if this will become a reality? Also what other goals do they have, they may want to play in a hockey league, coach baseball for their son etc. Before any trainer can start to write a program they need a plan, if an assessment of the client doesn’t happen, the plan is irrelevant to the audience, in this case the client.

After I had input from students, I created an outline. This is parallel to the program writing phase, arguably the most important component of personal training and the phase that personal trainers are most likely not to complete. I have clients and also have my own workouts; I can barely remember my own workout let alone another 20+ sessions a week. If I do not have a program planned in advance and if I do not take notes on a form of daily log how can I be sure that my client is progressing? How can I create logical solutions to postural deviencies, or prescribe exercise that is relevant to my client’s goals and needs? Not to mention the importance of remembering pre-existing conditions. Not using a program is like trying to build a house without any blueprints. It does not matter how great the builder is - if there are no blueprints, the plan is arbitrary. The builder is throwing a house together and hoping it stands.

Trainers will argue that writing a program prior to collecting money is a waste of time. A builder however must complete blueprints before you hire him to build your house. Would you hire someone that promised you a great house without any plans? If a potential client doesn’t buy their program, follow up with them after 4-6 weeks. If they have not achieved their fitness goals outlined with you, a new opportunity arises.

As trainers we have to take pride in what we do and represent our profession well. We shouldn’t be looking to sell “sessions” but rather sell people on their fitness dreams, sell them on their goal. Yes you may be the only trainer at your gym that has a program, but you are probably the trainer that has clients reaching their goals while doing it safely and injury free. Being a good trainer is about paying attention to details. So why is it important for trainers to write programs? For me it comes down to one simple thing, it is what great trainers do!!

About The Author:

Graeme graduated from Park Lane College (England) with a Diploma in Sports Science, in 1998. Through his life Graeme has always competed athletically at high levels in Rugby, Cricket, and Boxing.

Following college Graeme's Career started at "South Leeds Stadium" working with all ages from 10-84. Graeme has worked with paraplegics and the blind. Graeme also taught fitness classes to large groups of all ages and abilities. While working at "South Leeds Stadium" Graeme became involved with the "Hunslet Hawks Professional Rugby Team" (and was part of the 1999 Division One Playoff Championship Team). Also Graeme worked with Pro and Olympic Boxers, Javelin and Gymnast Olympiads in his time at "South Leeds Stadium". Graeme worked with these athletes both on an individual and team basis.

In June of 1999 Graeme moved to the US. Shortly thereafter Graeme started to work for the "Harvard Business School" (HBS) serving as a personal trainer to the staff, faculty, and students. In his time at HBS Graeme also served as the strength coach and coach of the HBS Rugby Team. During the Summer of 2001 Graeme also served as the strength and conditioning coach for Harvard's Undergraduate Varsity Teams. In January of 2000 Graeme started S5 Personal Training an in home based personal training business and was working on this part time until summer of 2002 when Graeme decided to pursue it on a full time basis. Some of S5 clients have included Vice Presidents of companies, Professional Athletes, College Athletes, Children, and Post Rehab Clients.

Along with David Gleason, Graeme co-invented and developed The Omni Resistance Ball (The ORB)- a piece of fitness equipment that was introduced to the fitness profession in September 2002. This has given both Dave and Graeme the opportunity to present along side names such as Juan Carlos Santana and Victor Verhage.

Graeme now works with many clientelle ranging from 10 yr olds through to 84 yr olds, some of whom are recovering from stroke, MMA fighters, Ms Fitness USA competitors, New England Judo, Olympians, and NCAA Division 1 athletes.

2009-03-26T12:56:00.000-07:00

Hello Everyone!
I wanted to share this milestone in the process that I have been discussing with many of you in terms of creating new and higher standards. I was a main committee member on behalf of AAPT with NOCA and after a year of work the standard has received approval as an American National Standard – very exciting!

info@noca.org
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
NOCA 1100 - STANDARD FOR ASSESSMENT-BASED CERTIFICATE PROGRAMS RECEIVES APPROVAL AS AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD
WASHINGTON, DC (March 26, 2009) - The National Organization for Competency Assurance (NOCA) announced today that its recently published NOCA 1100 - Standard for Assessment-Based Certificate Programs (2009) received approval as an American National Standard by the American National Standard Institute (ANSI) Board of Standards Review.

Approval by ANSI signifies that the procedures used by NOCA met the Institute's Essential Requirements for openness, balance, consensus and due process. Adherence to these requirements results in a level playing field for all stakeholders, contributing to the development of standards that benefits those who participate in the process, the general public, and the nation. The Standard is the end result of more than a year's effort from the NOCA Main Committee, a highly qualified and balanced group of experts representing the certificate provider community, human resource professionals, universities and academia, certification professionals, and government agencies.

Lenora Knapp, PhD, Chair of the NOCA Main Committee stated, "Receiving approval from ANSI validates the commitment and value that NOCA and the Main Committee members placed on developing the standard in an open and fair process."

Paul Grace, NOCA President, expressed gratitude to the NOCA Main Committee and to all stakeholders who came together and worked so diligently to ensure the process adhered to the stringent requirements set by the American National Standard system. Mr. Grace noted, "NOCA is proud to place 'an American National Standard' designation on the ANSI/NOCA 1100 standard - as an organization we strongly value the principles required in our standards process and the value it brings to all stakeholders impacted by the credentialing community."

The Standard specifies essential requirements for certificate programs and provides guidance to program providers, consumers (both participants and employers) and others on what defines a high-quality program. In addition, the Standard is designed to be used by accrediting bodies as the benchmark standard for evaluating the quality of certificate programs. The project was initiated with the goal of setting high-quality standards for certificate programs while also helping to reduce confusion in the marketplace related to certification programs and certificate programs.

The Standard is available to NOCA members at no charge and to non-NOCA members for a fee of $75 per copy. To obtain a copy of the Standard please visit our website at www.noca.org.

Established in 1977, NOCA is the international leader in setting quality standards for credentialing organizations and through its division, the National Commission for Certifying Agencies (NCCA), has provided over 30 years of accrediting services to the credentialing industry. NOCA's membership is composed of credentialing organizations, testing companies and individual professional development consultants. Through its annual conference, web seminars and publications, NOCA serves as the source for information on the latest trends and issues of concern to practitioners and organizations focused on certification, licensure and human resources development. NOCA and NCCA are headquartered in Washington, DC, with an office in Chicago. The Web site address is www.noca.org.

NOCA D.C. NOCA Chicago
2025 M Street, NW 401 North Michigan Ave
Suite 800 Chicago, IL 60610
Washington, DC 20036 312.673.5770 (tel)
202.367.1165 (tel) 312.673.6908 (fax)
202.367.2165 (fax)
info@noca.org

www.noca.org

Copyright © 2007
National Organization for Competency Assurance
2025 M Street NW Suite 800, Washington DC 20036
E: info@noca.org • T: 202-367-1165 • F: 202-367-2165

Certification, Accreditation, Recognition – What‘s the Difference?

2009-03-20T13:15:00.000-07:00

Written By:
Angela Corcoran BS, MS, HFI, RCEP, CSCS
Head of Education
The American Academy of Personal Training

In 1998, I graduated from the Rutgers University Exercise Science program in New Brunswick, New Jersey as one of very few students in a new major. Initially I thought I would continue my education and find a career as an Occupational Therapist. However, after my senior internship, I realized that this profession was not for me. I was left in the precarious position of having no job and a degree that was largely unheard of.

I decided to fill some time with personal training. Never did I think of personal training as a profession. However, I was surprised to find that my personal training colleagues were better than me at the hands on aspect of training but there was something missing. They were comfortable navigating weights and moving with the flow on the gym floor but were lacking critical knowledge of physiology, anatomy, kinesiology, and special populations. I believe this made their training methods dangerous and potentially fatal. It was at this time that I began to question the personal training industry and its regulation. After all, at this early stage in my career I had both a certification and a college degree and I was uncomfortable on a gym floor! My personal training colleagues had so many certifications with so many different abbreviations.. I was confused. There's ACE, NASM, ACSM, NSCA, IFPA, NCSF, IFFA, just to name a few. I asked myself; what is the difference between these certifications? And how is this industry regulated?

It took no more than a 10 minute search on the internet to discover that the personal training industry is completely unregulated and unmonitored. Organizations such as IHRSA are huge promoters of “self regulation”. This is completely astounding to me! You have to have a license to be a beautician; to cut someone's hair. You also have to have a license to perform a manicure or a massage. But you don't need a license to put a 50 year old person with medical problems through a workout? Think about it. Under the current standards a personal trainer with very limited medical knowledge can take someone with a potentially life threatening illness (like heart disease) and put him or her on a treadmill (essentially performing a stress test) with absolutely no knowledge of potential risk, and absolutely no oversight.

So where does the responsibility lie? It falls on the consumer and the owners of facilities that employ personal trainers. Because of this many gym owners have begun “in house” education programs. I am very familiar with these programs, as I was employed by Equinox Fitness for a long time working on their “in house” program which they call EFTI. I applaud any gym that attempts to create a standard when none exists. However, after years of trying I can tell you that it simply does not work. First of all, the people teaching these programs are typically unqualified. They themselves lack the required knowledge and training. Let alone the skills to teach. So why do these programs exits? Unfortunately, it all comes down to money. It's expensive to hire qualified teachers with advanced degrees to teach in depth scientific concepts. Second, gyms make more money when trainers are training, not when they are in school. So there's no incentive for a gym owner to hold back an under qualified trainer when he/she could be training clients. Typically gyms require some kind of national certification within 6 months of employment. However, many trainers that are working are not certified. Many never get their certification or don't stay current and re-certify. Astonishingly, even trainers that are certified may not be qualified.

So what agency "certifies" a program? The NCCA, the National Commission for Certifying Agencies, is the leading agency on accreditation in the field of personal training. There are hundreds of “certifications” available for individuals who want to become a personal trainer, but only those accredited through the NCCA should be considered (visit http://www.noca.org/). When I was hired as the Head of Education at AAPT, I decided that becoming accredited through NCCA was the next logical and important step after our state license. What I discovered was shocking. As a state licensed school we were not eligible. How is that possible? Our educational standard at AAPT far exceeds any at-home study course or program without teachers or hands on practical training. What I discovered, was that in order to be accredited through NOCA and NCCA we had to offer our "exam" to anyone who walked through the door. But that was not an option. According to the rules and regulations of the State Education Department, all of our students MUST attend our classes and receive instruction from our teachers. Attending class is a requirement to take the exam. A certification is an accredited exam, it does not ensure practic, only book knowledge. The NCCA, which has oversight through NOCA (National Organization for Competency Assurance), will not allow you to become accredited unless you allow the general public to just sit for your exam. So you can see our dilemma. As an educational institution we were immediately ineligible even though our standard was much more stringent and thorough. As a licensed school, we must guarantee that our students not only have the knowledge.. but also the hands on practical training. Our NY State and The Commonwealth of Massachusetts licenses strive to ensure that our graduates can work in the field. Virtually guaranteeing that they are not only knowledgeable, but competent. A certification simply means that you passed a test.

Full of disappointment and frustration, I was not about to give up. After numerous attempts to contact NCCA, I received a call from Jim Kendzel; from NOCA. Jim was very sympathetic and helpful regarding AAPT's plight and he actually agreed with me. He invited me to sit on a board aimed at developing a new standard for assessment based certificate programs. The first step was just passed by the American National Standards Institute with NOCA, and is available to view at http://www.noca.org/. AAPT is in the process of applying for this standard right now. Receiving recognition through this standard is the closest any school could get to an accreditation through NCCA/NOCA at this time. But stay tuned, I envision an even higher standard and will continue to work with NCCA to achieve that goal.

So what exactly is recognition? There are a few organizations that offer recognition. One is IACET, or the International Association for Continuing Education and Training. Essentially IACET evaluates all aspects of the learning model and ensures it is valid. They then have a standard model of awarding continuing education units. We have just completed the application process (which was no easy task). The application which I ultimately submitted was approximately 1200 pages long. I am not allowed to share the standards directly with you, but essentially there are 10 standards that evaluate everything from the condition of the learning environment, to teacher qualifications to student examination. A far more rigorous requirement than getting a certificate accredited. Although it was a great challenge, I believe the qualifications they set forth should become the standard for all schools offering personal training education.

Ultimately the field of personal training should be a licensed profession. After years of experience in hiring personal trainers, I can’t believe that the industry is still allowed to exist in the manner that it does. The dangers of allowing unqualified people to prescribe exercise programs to individuals is simply terrifying and could be lethal in some cases. The interest and employment potential in this industry is growing exponentially each year. With the growth of the industry comes growth in the certification boom. This has added a huge degree of confusion for people wanting to become personal trainers.

I feel fortunate to have landed at AAPT. The vision of the school is very simple. AAPT strives to become the model for licensure even though no such model. It has set the highest standard in personal training education through its educational model, its curriculum, and the employment of top qualified educators in the personal training industry.