Why are they teaching program design before exercise technique?
Last week I was having a few chats with some of my students at Langara College, who are doing some continuing education in the field of Personal Fitness Training. I am always interested in what my students are doing outside of the confines of the academic world and how they might be learning to bridge the gap between the theory they are learning at school and its application in the coursework provided by, (for-profit), organizations like Can Fit Pro and BCRPA, plus others into the USA as well.
The general consensus is that they are learning a great deal about program design, or rather, the manipulation of the acute and chronic training variables, such as sets, reps, loads and rest periods. Well, I am happy to see they are reviewing their grade 5 math skills. But learning that sets of 8-12 are optimal for hypertrophy and if we want muscle endurance, then it HAS to be 12-15 reps, with, of course, shorter rest periods just doesn’t cut it with my standards. Hmmmmm, try the turkish get-up with 16kg-24kg for 12-15 reps/side and your workout might take well over 30 minutes just to do that one exercise properly and slowly enough to engrain the stabilization and joint position sense the exercise is fundamentally based upon. You wouldn’t have time to do anything else, plus you would have lost concentration (something that is require for the TGU) at about the 10 minute mark. What I am trying to say is that, some exercises do not belong in the high rep category, no matter what the ‘goals’ of the program might be. Why are students learning these contraints, when if they actually experienced the exercises themselves, they would know what it feels like and what adaptation might occur?
Here is another program design pointer my students have claimed they have learned: With respect to exercise strength prescription for beginners, only do one to two sets of the exercise. Why is this? Beginners are at the cognitive stage of learning and NEED more sets and reps to hone their skills and practice. What they don’t need is high loads and rapid tempos. Even veteran lifters with bad habits might want to try more sets to ‘grease the groove’ and work on the technical aspects of an exercise before progressing into heavier loads. Strength is a skill right? Why is this mantra not taught in the continuing education system?
Continuing education bodies should really focus their energies and curriculum on aspects such as:
1. Teaching and evaluating students free weight exercise technique and the 5 pillars of movement. (Paul Chek)
2. Evaluation of a student’s ability to teach the exercise to a client and test whether learning has taken place within the client
3. Teaching students how to correct common faulty movement patterns with creative coaching cues – versus statements like “keep your knees over your toes” – if someone just isn’t getting it, the student must use other means to elicit the response they want. Hands on cueing and tactile stimulation is often the best strategy and is not emphasized enough.
The biggest problem I see in the industry today is that too many personal fitness trainers do not know how to coach proper technique. They, themselves often have poor skills on the 5 pillars of movement. They may have all the theoretical skills and book-smarts, but they cannot put it all together. And it isn’t their fault, because they were never educated in this manner, nor were they evaluated in this manner.
Imagine a hair stylist that passes hair styling school, having only written a theory exam on ‘how to cut and style hair’ yet never touching a client. Imagine a massage therapist getting through their education system without actually giving someone a massage? I know it sounds absolutely ridiculous, but currently there are only TWO certifying agencies that evaluate a practitioner’s ability to perform the exercises and teach them as well. These are the RKC (Russian Kettlebell Challenge) and Human Motion’s BSF Cert Course. Both of these education systems encourage the execution of correct technique and the ability to coach correct technique. The sets, reps and rest periods – well that is actually the easy part.
At Human Motion, our coaches go through a year of mentorship with myself (MSc. CSCS, RKC) , Cliff Harvey, who is a world champ in weightlifting and a naturopath and Jim Talo, my husband, who is an RKC Level 2. I have decided that I need to be part of the solution and offer this opportunity to the right people who, if they choose to stay with Human Motion, they can offer an excellent service, or if they choose to leave and do their own thing, well at least I can sleep at night knowing I have released a bird that can fly.
Please post your comments on this blog.
Or perhaps re-post it – you have my permission to do so.
Yours in strength & health,
Coach bott