Browse

This report documents the fifth National Academy of Kinesiology Doctoral Program Evaluation (DPE) for U.S. doctoral programs in kinesiology. Three years (2020–2022) of data were collected and analyzed from doctoral programs at 35 institutions. Eleven faculty indices and six student indices were used to rank doctoral programs. Total T-scores (unadjusted and adjusted for both faculty size and outlying scores) were calculated to create two rankings. Correlations of indices’ T-scores with total T-score were calculated to inform potential refinement of the National Academy of Kinesiology DPE. Participating programs varied widely in title, disciplinary emphasis/Classification of Instructional Program code, and number (5–37) of faculty. The mean number of doctoral faculty and students increased from the fourth DPE cycle. The correlations of most indices with total program T-score had values similar to those reported in the previous DPE cycles. Demographic data are reported and discussed for ranked and some unranked indices for program benchmarking and consideration for refinement of future DPE cycles.

A constellation of emerging trends in contemporary higher education has led to reorganizations, consolidations, and mergers of academic units that directly impact kinesiology. These changes increasingly locate kinesiology within colleges of health and human sciences (HHS). This article addresses the opportunities and challenges for the future of kinesiology within consolidated HHS units. Synthesizing recent trends in higher education, historical and contemporary perspectives from the field, and our experience in leading a merged HHS unit, we identify conceptual and pragmatic considerations facing kinesiology. The potential impact of merged college structures upon kinesiology warrants further inquiry given the limited attention these changes have received. Kinesiology will benefit from systematic evaluation and planning to enhance the impact of these organizational changes on kinesiology in their new integrated college structures. We propose that the National Academy of Kinesiology is well positioned to provide leadership to kinesiology units in navigating these changes and advancing the missions of integrated HHS units.

This paper builds on previous reviews of physical education/sport pedagogy research over time in the areas of teaching, teacher education, and curriculum. Ideas are shared about the evolution of terminology, specializations, research, methodology, theoretical frameworks, journals and publishing outlets, parent disciplines, and where programs sit in universities. This paper also highlights contributions of the 52 National Academy of Kinesiology fellows in the area of physical education/sport pedagogy. These fellows have been productive with high H-indexes and citation numbers, suggesting high scholarly productivity, as well as impactful work. There have been recent closures of physical education/sport pedagogy doctoral programs, some of which have been offset by new and reemerging programs. Doctoral programs are critical to the future of research in physical education so that the current success can continue.

At the National Academy of Kinesiology’s annual meeting in 2023, four International Fellows shared their insights into whether there is a global narrative for kinesiology. Panelists comprising Fasting (Norwegian, sport sociology), Jacobs (Canadian, exercise physiologist), Macdonald (Australian, pedagogy), and Tsung-Min Hung (Taiwanese, sport and exercise psychology) spanned both subdisciplines and continents. This paper represents a synthesis of their thinking, complemented with more incidental views from a range of scholars who accepted an invitation from Macdonald to contribute brief perspectives. Framing the paper are the concepts of globalization and its tethered process of neoliberalization, the latter argued to be a dominant ideology in many Western democracies that shapes the priorities of educational institutions. We conclude that the term “kinesiology” is not universally deployed to reference the discipline, although global narratives related to program priorities, knowledge status, metrics, and professionalization in the four continents represented exist.

This paper traces the path of the role of exercise in promoting health and the emergence of scientific study of the physiology of exercise from ancient times through modern times. Ancient physician–philosophers taught that exercise was important for health and employed exercise to control diseases such as diabetes and obesity, to offset the effects of aging, and for military preparedness. By the early modern era, the first books on exercise had been published, and the start of the use of exercise for therapy, rehabilitation, and occupational medicine emerged. Philosopher scientists proposed and applied experimental methods as early as the Middle Ages, and the scientific method was further developed during the early modern period. Experiments about the physiological responses to exercise began in the middle of the 19th century. The application of innovative research methods resulted in exponential gains in knowledge about the physiology of exercise throughout the 20th and 21st centuries.

This essay, written as part of an invited address for the National Academy of Kinesiology’s 92nd annual meeting, with the overarching theme being “Honoring the Past, Celebrating the Present, Embracing the Future,” provides an assessment of the evolution of sport and exercise psychology, or what I refer to as the psychology of physical activity. Specifically, I examine the role that psychology of physical activity has played since the academy was established, with particular attention to the contributions of academy fellows. I then provide my reflections on the current status and critical issues for the psychology of physical activity. Finally, I offer some thoughts on future directions for the subdiscipline in the broader field of kinesiology and some thoughts on how the academy could advance the academic discipline of kinesiology.