Browse

Based on the lessons learned from history and articulation of paradigm change in science, this article clarifies the concept of curriculum alignment and describes the risk of curriculum disalignment between school physical education and kinesiology. Through contextualizing kinesiology as an integrated science, it explains the difference between a discipline and a field (subdiscipline) and argues that K–12 physical education is an integral and indispensable component of kinesiology. The article provides detailed discussions about the historical reasons/events that might have led to the curriculum disalignment and the ways the disalignment can be understood and addressed. Based on the analysis, a four-pillar framework (science, health, culture, and education) is proposed as a platform for “doing kinesiology” and a way to address the curriculum disalignment crisis.

This essay is based on the premise that kinesiology has evolved into a field made up of disparate subdisciplinary areas contributing to fragmentation and lack of common goals and objectives since the publication of Franklin M. Henry’s famous 1964 essay “Physical Education: An Academic Discipline.” As it now stands, there is much evidence of significant disparity between kinesiology’s creed and its practice, with the field failing to fulfill its promise of an integrationist approach to the study of human movement. In order to rectify this situation, steps should be taken to encourage individuals in the field to cross subdisciplinary boundaries, practice what psychologist Jonathan Baron has referred to as “active open-mindedness,” and take seriously the cues provided in the books by Rafe Sagarin, Learning from the Octopus: How Secrets from Nature Can Help Us Fight Terrorist Attacks, Natural Disasters, and Diseases, and Sy Montgomery, The Soul of an Octopus: A Surprising Exploration Into the Wonders of Consciousness. One specific recommendation is for academicians in kinesiology to prepare students to become polymaths, a term describing individuals with a thorough knowledge of one subject and broad understanding of many others.

This paper traces the evolution of scholarship in motor learning and development over the last ∼100 years, with a focus on contributions by Fellows from the National Academy of Kinesiology (NAK). It begins with a brief discussion of the centrality of motor skillfulness in kinesiology, followed by a discussion of the appropriate label for the study of motor learning and development. The bulk of the paper focuses on the important events and milestones in the field and an examination of the most influential frameworks and models that NAK Fellows have put forward to guide research. The final section looks at future prospects and challenges for the field. Two key findings emerge: (a) Considerable overlap exists in the theoretical frameworks, conceptual models, empirical questions, research methodologies, and practical applications that dominate scholarship in motor learning and development, and (b) NAK Fellows have made enormous contributions to the field.

In line with the 2023 conference theme, I first honor the past, then move to the present, and offer my views on embracing the future. In doing so, my theme is connection. That is, we need to hang together and connect with our professionals, our communities, and the public, as well as with each other. From our beginning in the late 1800s through much of our history, we were connected through physical education, but since the 1960s we have shifted away from physical education to disciplinary specializations and lost connections. Graduate programs, especially PhD programs, focus on preparing researchers in specialized areas. Although we no longer focus on physical education, we do have strong professional connections to the allied health areas. By strengthening our connections with our professionals and the public, we can make important contributions to the health and well-being of our communities and larger society and embrace the future.

Sport management programs continue to expand and be a popular major in institutions of higher education. The aim of this article is to share the contributions made by National Academy of Kinesiology fellows to the growth of sport management. A brief background of sport management is presented followed by an overview of each fellow’s unique contributions. More specifically, lessons learned from our first three fellows in sport management and contributions made by current members are highlighted. Next, a discussion of the current status and critical issues facing sport management is presented. The concluding section includes scholars’ thoughts and directions for future scholarship in sport management.

Individual preference and tolerance can be seen as relevant traits for the understanding of the relationship between exercise intensity and behavioral outcomes. To better understand that relationship, this scoping review aimed to analyze preference for, and tolerance of, exercise intensity constructs in physical activity settings by verifying the contextual utility and feasibility of the subscales in the multiple settings of their application, the interpretation of the subscales, associations with other variables, and the reported limitations of the subscales’ use. The search was conducted through PubMed, SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, and B-on databases. Inclusion criteria were healthy individuals including athletes, experimental and nonexperimental studies written in English based on the assessment of subjective intensity in exercise; studies including the variables tolerance and/or preference. Exclusion criteria were instrument validation studies with no concurrent data, gray literature, and systematic reviews. Thirty-six studies published between 2005 and 2022 were analyzed. Results indicate that both constructs appear to be useful and feasible in various physical activity settings. No relevant limitations were reported for its use. Preference and tolerance constructs assessed with the PRETIE-Q (Preference for and Tolerance of the Intensity of Exercise Questionaire) seem to offer a simple but useful understanding of the individual relation with exercise intensity in several physical activity–related outcomes.

The objective of this review was to systematically summarize the existing literature on the effect of core muscle training on measures of balance and agility in athletes. A search was conducted to identify the eligible articles on core muscle training, balance, agility, and athletes in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database that were published from inception to April 15, 2022. The literature search retrieved 3,299 articles, of which 17 randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria of the review. Two reviewers independently performed study selection and assessed the quality of included studies using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale, and a third reviewer was consulted in case of disagreements. The quality of the studies was mixed. Core muscle training can be used to target balance and agility in athletes. Furthermore, core training of variable frequency, intensity, and type can be incorporated in athletic programs to improve balance and agility.