A Healthy Administrative Triad: Hiring, Evaluating, and Retaining Kinesiology Faculty
Jason R. Carter and Nancy Williams
Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Kinesiology: Survey Results from the 2016 AKA Workshop
Jason R. Carter, Penny McCullagh, and Rick Kreider
Over the past decade, institutions of higher education have been forced to become more innovative and entrepreneurial, seeking creative solutions to budget challenges. This has been particularly important within kinesiology programs, which represent one of the largest growing sectors of higher education over the past 10–15 years. In preparation for the 2016 American Kinesiology Association (AKA) Leadership Workshop, a survey was administered by the AKA to capture key institutional classifications (i.e., Carnegie classification, institutional size, public vs. private designation) and department chair or designated administrator perceptions on entrepreneurial issues relevant to their unit. Sixty-eight of 881 units surveyed responded, yielding a response rate of 7.7%. The majority of respondents (67%) indicated a unit funding model that was based on the previous year’s level (i.e., historical budget model). While the majority of respondents reported that their unit is provided with “adequate to plentiful” resources (59%), this varied widely based on institutional classification. Specifically, baccalaureate institutions (Chi-square 18.054, p < .001) and institutions with < 5,000 students (Chi-square 10.433, p & .015) had the least favorable perceptions of unit resource allocation. For the majority of entrepreneurial activities and partnerships (5 of 8 targeted questions), ≥ 50% of the respondents reported “no involvement.” There was a significant mismatch between actual vs. expected time spent by the department chair on fundraising activities (Chi-square 4.627, p = .031), with higher expectations than actual time spent on fundraising. In summary, the AKA survey suggests that there is tremendous heterogeneity in perceptions of and participation in entrepreneurial activities within kinesiology, and that there remains strategic areas of opportunity within the field.
Building Department Visibility and Support through Strategic Partnerships and Innovation
Jason R. Carter, Nancy I. Williams, and Wojtek J. Chodzko-Zajko
Building departmental visibility and support is essential to the success of any kinesiology unit. This paper provides an overview of different strategies taken by three American Kinesiology Association member departments to advance their respective units. Each program was faced with unique institutional goals and structures, yet each institutional example highlights the shared theme of building strategic partnerships and cultivating a culture of entrepreneurship and innovation. Common strategies across the three institutions included a genuine understanding of university priorities and politics, chair and faculty leadership, strong internal and external communication, a willingness to lead and think creatively, and maintaining a focus on academic and educational excellence.
Promoting Quality Undergraduate Education in Kinesiology
Thomas J. Templin, Jason R. Carter, and Kim C. Graber
Chronic Standing Desk Use and Arterial Stiffness
Ian M. Greenlund, Piersan E. Suriano, Steven J. Elmer, Jason R. Carter, and John J. Durocher
Background: Sedentary activity and sitting for at least 10 hours per day can increase the risk for cardiovascular disease by more than 60%. Use of standing desks may decrease sedentary time and improve cardiovascular health. Acute standing lowers pulse wave velocity (PWV), but chronic effects remain unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of chronic standing desk use on arterial stiffness versus seated controls. Methods: A total of 48 adults participated in this study. Twenty-four participants qualified as seated desk users (age 41  y, body mass index 25  kg/m2) and 24 as standing desk users (age 45  y, body mass index 25  kg/m2). Arterial stiffness was assessed as PWV within the aorta, arm, and leg. Results: Carotid–femoral PWV (cfPWV) was not different between seated (6.6 [1.3] m/s) and standing (6.9 [1.3] m/s) groups (P = .47). Similarly, there were no differences in arm or leg PWV between groups (P = .13 and P = .66, respectively). A secondary analysis of traditional factors of age and aerobic fitness revealed significant differences in cfPWV in seated and standing desk participants. Age also significantly influenced cfPWV across conditions. Conclusions: Standing for >50% of a workday did not affect PWV. Consistent with previous research, fitness and age are important modulators of arterial stiffness.