Roberta J. Park: Paving the Sport History Highway While Saving Physical Education From a House Divided

in Kinesiology Review
View More View Less

Internationally acclaimed sport historian Roberta Park was among the Academy of Kinesiology’s leading scholars. Her extensive career at the University of California, Berkeley, was a powerful example of one woman’s agency and success in the hierarchical world of higher education. Systematically opening up the breadth of embodied and gendered practices deemed suitable for examination by sport historians, Park’s pioneering scholarship helped turn a narrow lane into the broad highway of sport history. She demonstrated that it is neither possible nor desirable to study the history of medicine, health, or fitness without accounting for the body, raising provocative questions about the historical origins of training regimens for sport and exercise, and excavating the histories of the biomedical sciences to better understand the antecedents of sports medicine and exercise science. She never abandoned her faith in the importance of the profession of physical education, properly supported by scholarly enquiry, holding up Berkeley’s foundational program as a template to guide physical education’s future and grieving its demise in 1997.

Roberta J. Park, one of the National Academy of Kinesiology’s leading scholars and internationally well-known sport historian and physical educator, passed away on December 5, 2018, at the age of 87. Her extensive career at the University of California, Berkeley, as student, teacher, colleague, administrator, and researcher was a powerful example of one woman’s agency, determination, and success (as well as disappointments) in the hierarchical world of higher education, with its ambiguous and shifting attachment to the profession and discipline of physical education and sport science. Systematically opening up the breadth of embodied and gendered practices deemed suitable for examination by sport historians, Park’s pioneering and meticulous scholarship helped turn a narrow lane into the broad and busy highway that sport history has now become—a highway where many of those who knew and admired her and were helped and supported by her are frequent travelers. She never abandoned her faith in the importance of the profession of physical education, properly supported by scholarly enquiry in all the respective subdisciplines of sport and exercise science. Indeed, many of her colleagues remember well how often she remonstrated passionately at meetings and conferences that it was “deeds” not “words” that mattered most in the making of healthy and physically active citizens. “I place the gymnasium above the meeting house,” she used to say, and “I have a great respect for saints with strong bodies.”

Park’s triumphs in articulating and supporting the academic world of physical education built on her own physical acuity and love of sport. She grew up in Oakland, CA, loving sport and surrounded by men who loved sport. In a poignant article written for a special issue of Aethlon: The Journal of Sport Literature on the topic of fathers and sport, she declared,

My dad loved sports of all kinds and thanks to him I could throw both accurately and further than most of the boys in my neighborhood. There is no doubt that his interest in sports—which certainly fostered mine—laid the foundations for what would become a career of almost half a century. (Park, 2002, p. 97)

Park was an only child in an extended working-class family with roots in northern England and learned to enjoy practicing manual skills, playing baseball and basketball and going fishing and hunting. Her first gun was a hand-me-down from her uncle, and she took it with her on her first hunting trip when she was 12 years old. Her exuberant physicality was dampened, she remembered, in her ninth grade at high school by the realization that “one’s recreational life was supposed to be defined by established social norms rather than by one’s preferences” (Park, 2002, p. 95). She was disappointed to learn that her opportunities to play were restricted to the available girls’ high school sports, mostly softball and basketball. At graduation, she said, she won the honor award for Spanish, “but I would have preferred it in girls’ physical education” (Park, 2002, p. 92).

Given the working-class background of her family, it is likely that Park would not have gone to college had it not been for her mother’s insistence that a college education was distinctly preferable to a blue-collar job. Even when she did enroll as an undergraduate student at the University of California, Berkeley, she continued to work many hours a week to support her studies. She did not select physical education as a major, choosing instead a focus on the romance languages, in which she had excelled in high school. It was when she came upon classes run by the Women’s Athletic Association on the Berkeley campus and found enormous pleasure in taking classes in fencing and field hockey that she decided to switch her major to physical education. “Part of life is planning and part of life is luck,” reflected Park on her early college days, for in no time she was taking exercise physiology classes with Franklin Henry in the Department of Physical Education and sensing a growing interest in the history of the subject. “Little did I know then,” she said, “that one day history would become my focus and my love, as well as a mission” (Park, 1987, pp. 194–195).1

Embedded in Berkeley as a student, teacher, colleague, administrator, and researcher, Park would later become an expert on the origins and development of the bachelor of arts degree in physical education at the University of California, Berkeley, both illuminating its history and significance in the wider field and grieving its demise in 1997 (Park, 1981; 1991). Until it was disestablished in 1997, Berkeley’s well-known program, first created in 1886 as the University of California’s Department of Physical Culture, was the oldest continuous physical education major at any American university (Wilmore, 1998).2 Its auspicious start was supported, at least for women, by the philanthropy of Phoebe Apperson Hearst, who provided a women’s gymnasium at Hearst Hall, moved later in sections to the Berkeley campus in 1899. Park illuminated the world of Berkeley’s physical culture and physical education administrative and educational arrangements for both women and men across the entire twentieth century in articles about its leaders, faculty, and coaches so that their work and experiences would not be lost from our memory. She wanted to show how the Berkeley physical education program could be seen as a sort of political headquarters for developing the template that might best guide physical education’s future.

Indeed, no other academic researcher in the field, which has been variously described over time as physical education, kinesiology, sport and exercise science, movement science, or sports studies, has turned such a penetrating gaze on a specific degree program and contextualized it so carefully within the complex and uneven history of the profession and discipline of physical education in North America. This is not to deny the strenuous efforts of Franklin Henry to enhance the status of the subject in higher education in the 1960s, about which much discussion has taken place, including a penetrating analysis by Park of his views concerning the need for a cross-disciplinary matrix of knowledge in the field (Park, 1994b). By the time of his obligatory retirement in 1971, Henry had spent more than 30 years as a faculty member at Berkeley, and despite no formal training in physical education “had seen better than did most people its importance as a profession and its potential for becoming an [sic] viable academic field” (Parks, Brooks, & Scott, 1993, para. 5). Park wrote that she learned from, benefited from, and built on Henry’s leadership by continuing to insist on physical education as a worthy focus of study. His was a concept, she said, that underscored the same desire for a liberal education in physical education that had been expressed by the early founders of the field more than half a century earlier—a program that brought researchers and practitioners to work together in a well-designed cross-disciplinary matrix.

Park warned later that an inability to reconcile professional and academic demands, as well as increasingly narrow specialization, was threatening the future of physical education as an organized field (Park, 1998).3 In particular, she feared that the growing lure of scientism, or what one might term “science envy,” to which she believed physical educators were particularly susceptible, militated against a study of the insight and methodologies of history. In many respects, she was right, and even though she had taken on the leadership of Berkeley’s Department of Physical Education in 1982 and successfully steered it along as one of the preeminent physical education departments in the United States and beyond, the 1980s was also the site of a more general retreat of physical education from the Academy, an increasing number of departmental closures, and the growing impetus for scientific research to triumph over professional concerns.

In the article “The Second Hundred Years: Can Physical Education Become the Renaissance Field of the 21st century?” Park (1989) highlighted, with more hope than conviction perhaps, what she saw as the integrative possibilities and potentials of the educative, therapeutic, and recreative divisions of the field, using the example of Berkeley as a beacon of research-based enquiry into the effects of exercise on the human system. This paper, notes Alison Wrynn, one of Robbie’s former doctoral students, was the subject of Park’s Amy Morris Homans Lecture at the 1988 meeting of the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAHPERD—now the Society of Health and Physical Educators [SHAPE America])—where she posited that, at the beginning of its second century, physical education was perhaps poised to become the Renaissance profession of the new millennium. Through an analysis of the rise of the profession of physical education at the end of the nineteenth century, parallel to the emerging transformation of medical education in the first decades of the twentieth century, Park contended that physical education could and must learn from the now highly respected medical profession. However, she said, it would take “an attitude that prizes systematized knowledge, constant questioning and the ability to forge links and see interdependencies” (Park, 1989).

Indeed, in her detailed research on the professional struggles of physical education, Park drew frequent analogies to medicine, suggesting that it had risen like a phoenix from a state of disarray in the late nineteenth century to a position of veneration during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Nor was she subtle in her admonishment of the physical education profession to learn from medicine. Medicine, she pointed out, learned very quickly during the mid-twentieth century to incorporate exercise into its professional organizations and billing routines as exercise medicine and to work closely with exercise scientists to promote the new mantra “Exercise is Medicine”—not physical education, kinesiology, or sport science. It was certainly a window of opportunity for an overabundance of doctors at the time to put their own muscle behind the exercise bandwagon, leap aboard as it got rolling, and provide further legitimacy for medical involvement in exercise schemes and their claim to property rights for physical fitness (Solomon, 1984). Park would have drawn attention to the official historical time line of the activities of the American College of Sport Medicine from its foundation in 1953 to the present, to point out that the word “education” rarely appears and that sport had become overwhelmingly the business of medicine and science.4 While she did not argue against specialization, her concern was that scholars in kinesiology might no longer be able to systematically attack complex questions without a broader view and understanding of the field. Indeed, she would have had mixed feelings about the biomedicalization of twenty-first century kinesiology and the triumph of the laboratory over the gymnasium in leading U.S. institutions (Vertinsky, 2017). At the same time, the fact that Berkeley did not have a medical school was likely an important contributor to the lack of support for its physical education major in the late 1990s, because it oriented biology toward cellular and subcellular “visions.” When medical schools are part of the university, kinesiology departments can often provide an attractive training ground for pre-med and physiotherapy-inclined students.

Gender and Sport History

When it came to scholarship, Park recognized her marginal status as both sport historian and female academic in the academy and the reality that sport history occupied a low rung on the mobility ladder on the Berkeley campus. Sport history, indeed, history more generally, was still largely a man’s world as she entered the professoriate, and the questions she asked were a prelude to developing trends in more interpretive and inclusive approaches to sport history (Vertinsky, 1994). In The Gender of History: Men, Women and Historical Practice, historian Bonnie Smith (1998) was forthright about how the academic practices of history had been negatively affected by gender, documenting that “the male historian typically claimed to be searching for genderless universal truths which in reality prioritized men’s history over women’s” (p. 235). Smith might well have been talking about the subdiscipline of sport history and the play of gender within it (as well as the role of the female sport historian in departments of kinesiology and/or the movement sciences). Sport, after all, has been one of the ways in which the male body has been constantly represented, examined, worshipped—all too often to the exclusion of the active female body.

Park navigated the gender wars of the 1970s and 1980s in sport history particularly well by remaining on the borders of an emerging, more radical feminist historiography. She was especially interested, as well as adept, in illuminating female accomplishments and leadership in the world of sport and physical education, although she was by no means a radical feminist. Her early work focused on women-centered investigations and related analyses of sex roles, although she soon took a leadership role in focusing on sport and gender issues involving both men and women in her work. In 1991, she edited a special issue of the Journal of Sport History that displayed the growing maturity and depth of scholarship in gender and sport history. “I want to make it clear,” she said, “that I consider sport history to be a category term that includes at least agonistic athletics, vigorous athletic pursuits and physical education and intersects with aspects of medicine, biology, social reform and a host of other topics” (Park, 1996, p. 274). New questions need to be added, she said, about the historical origins of health education, approaches to fitness, training regimens for sport and exercise, and so on that might borrow models from exercise physiology, sports medicine, and allied fields. Discoveries and development in biomedical sciences affect how people think about both health and fitness, she pointed out (1995), and “a judicious use of history could shed light on such matters and help the researcher to think more comprehensively about contemporary issues and practices” (p. 274).5

Park’s support was always for the student, especially the female student, to enjoy physical activity rather than participate in elite sport. In her research, she pointed out how few academics had shed light on the fact that physical education in the early twentieth century offered American women career possibilities and a certain amount of independence at a time when such opportunities were denied in almost all other professions—this despite the fact that they had to cope with working in a male domain (Park & Hult, 1993b). She thus had strong sympathy for leaders of women’s physical education in the 1920s and 1930s who rejected the highly competitive male model of athletics, and she labored diligently for an “athletics for all” model as reflected in the slogan “Every Girl in a Sport: A Sport for Every Girl.” This led her to worry about the effects of Title IX when it became law in 1972. Since the 1970s, she later pointed out, it has become fashionable to condemn female physical educators for hindering athletic opportunities for females but to ignore the fact that they were far more successful than their male counterparts in adhering to the hygienic and educational goals of the founders of their profession. In a summary of the recordings that Berkeley’s Bancroft Library made of her oral histories concerning the management of intercollegiate athletics, she recalled at length and somewhat bitterly,

I’m not against certain things in Title IX [but] I did not like that certain women used sports as banner for other kinds of things .Many didn’t know anything about sports …but they used Title IX as a hammer to advance their own agendas… And because sports are a very public thing and had been largely dominated by males they saw this as a way to move females much closer to what traditionally had been a male domain. (Park, 2010, audio file 11)

She also felt that in placing the emphasis on competitive varsity sports, club and intramural sports lost support along with school based physical education.

Indeed many young women students who would have become good physical education teachers were so captivated by all this Title IX glory that they turned away from things that mattered most to the general student, yet were not able to gain coaching jobs because varsity teams were all coached by the men; men who also gained the leadership positions in physical education departments. (Park, 2011, pp.167–168)

Park’s extensive historical work on gender, sport, and exercise was thus thoughtful, thorough, and very well documented, although she generally warned against an excessive reliance on theory. Sporting bodies are not simply abstractions, she would say, they are embedded in the immediacies of everyday lived experience. The use of imagination in research, she was not shy to point out, needed to be disciplined, not unfettered! Well aware that the practices of history—indeed its very definition—had long been shaped by gender, she pushed back against traditional male accounts when she thought necessary and pored through historical documents in libraries, exhibitions, and archives around the world to uncover remarkable achievements of women, as well as men, in sport and physical education. History, she often told her students, helps a person put things into broader contexts and can do much to help us broaden our own perspectives. It is also probably true, she noted as her career lengthened, that history becomes more interesting to those who have more of their own to ponder (Park, 2002).

A Corpus for the Body: Extending the History of Health, Fitness, and Sport

Park was one of the leading sport historians in the final decades of the twentieth century and into the twenty-first to demonstrate that it is neither possible nor desirable to study the history of medicine, illness, health, or fitness without accounting for the body. She raised provocative questions about the historical origins of training regimens for sport and exercise and dug deeply into the histories of the biomedical sciences to gain a clearer picture of the antecedents of modern sports medicine and exercise science. As her long-time friend and colleague Tony Mangan (2009) wrote, she was a scholar with at least one major mission—to win academic recognition for the study of the significance of the body in culture and cultures. Park’s questions about sports medicine rested on an already solid base of research collected by Jack Berryman, historian of medicine and physical culture and official historian of the American College of Sports Medicine, and herself in Essays in the History of Sports Medicine and were followed up by numerous studies, including work on high-protein diets, “damaged hearts,” and the causal relationships among health, longevity, and sport participation (Berryman & Park, 1992; Park, 1977a, 1977b). She scoured the historical literature to show how culturally determined conceptions of the body have been of utmost consequence in guiding shifting scientific and medical discourses, as well as defining power relationships. At the same time, she pointed out the importance of addressing technical and scientific knowledge in her own work. In 1994, she wrote,

My recent efforts to reconstruct daily physical activity patterns (functional fitness) of populations as diverse as medieval knights, monks and peasants, athletes, female coal miners and Caribbean slaves, required the assistance of physical and cultural anthropology, epidemiology, nutritional science, exercise physiology, archeology and other disciplines. (Park, 1994a ,p. 68)

They were brilliant studies involving painstaking research across acres of books, manuscripts, and tables and illuminated her special efforts to show her colleagues in the biomedical sciences how a judicious use of history could shed light on their research and training practices.6 It is time, she said boldly, “that our colleagues in the biomedical and physiological domains support and lend their expertise to good historical endeavours” (Park, 1995).

Some of the graduate students under her tutelage were already asking provocative new questions about these very issues and have continued to do so over many productive years. Susan Zieff, professor of kinesiology at San Francisco State University, for example, has analyzed not only historical questions related to social and cultural disparities in physical activity and public health but contemporary ones, as well. Deane Lamont, professor in the Department of Kinesiology at St. Mary’s College of California, has continued to conduct historical research with a focus on Park’s hometown of Oakland, CA. Alison Wrynn, professor of kinesiology at California State University, Long Beach, and an associate vice chancellor for the California State University system, was one of Roberta’s doctoral students. She began her academic journey at Springfield College, with its illustrious role in the development of the profession of physical education, before moving to U.C. Berkeley in 1989. “I was one of a fortunate few,” she says, “to have their academic path forged by Roberta Park and I am eternally grateful to her for taking a chance on me thirty years ago. . . . When you are in the midst of your doctoral program,” says Alison, “you don’t think about the generosity of your advisor as she spends hours reading and commenting on your work . . . but her careful training and insistence during our Ph.D. program that we understand the history and contemporary state of the University were a key to my ability to become an administrator in the California State University system” (Wrynn, 2019).

Park’s influence and research activities were not dimmed by her retirement in 1994, when shifting priorities at Berkeley and declining support for the physical education department led the Senate to disestablish the department in spite of a series of positive reviews. She had given her heart to Berkeley as student, faculty member, and academic and professional leader; Berkeley broke it with this series of decisions. Nevertheless, as a much-admired professor emerita, she agreed to continue serving on the Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate, chairing committees and providing advice on policy, instruction, rules, and elections. At her memorial, John Cummins, the chief of staff to four chancellors, recalled Park’s gifts as a leader:

Her big hands, her erect posture, her physical strength and stature were that of a coach/athlete, which she was. Her physical stature matched her character. She was strong willed, confident, outspoken, articulate, and persistent as scholar, teacher and manager. She saw the mind and the body as one, viewed the discipline of physical education in that light and always kept the value to the student in the forefront of all her professional activities. (Brooks, Li-Jue, & Zieff, 2019, Para. 9)

Park never wavered from her strong stance on the importance of exercise for a healthy mind and body. During retirement she came to her campus office every day, swam in Hearst pool at noon, and spent the afternoon with her research, often in the stacks at Bancroft Library. She continued to share her scholarship, writing articles and accumulating more accolades from the professional and academic organizations in which she was involved. Her eminence in the field was exemplified by the leadership positions she held over the many years of her career: President of the American Academy of Kinesiology, president of the National Association for Sport and Physical Education, and vice-president of the International Association for the History of Sport and Physical Education. She served on the editorial boards of a large number of scholarly journals, including section editor of the Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, editor of Quest, publications editor for the Association for the Anthropological Study of Play, and editorial board member of the Journal of Sport History, International Journal for the History of Sport and Physical Education, and Journal of Physical Education and Recreation.

Park’s research contributions were extensive, as were her citations. She edited a number of seminal books and monographs, as well as contributing many chapters in books. She published over a hundred articles in scholarly journals (and numerous others in proceedings, abstracts, book reviews, and professional journals) including the Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, Journal of Sport History, Quest, British Journal of Sport History (now Sport in History), the International Journal of the History of Sport, and the Canadian Journal of History of Sport and Physical Education (now Sport History Review). She traveled to conferences and workshops and delivered lectures and research presentations in all parts of the world, often as keynote or honored speaker. Her research output was extraordinary on any level; her extensive work on embodiment, sport, health, and physical practices in historical context widely admired; and her friendship and support deeply appreciated.

In particular, her mentorship was generous and capacious, at times extending over decades. As a young faculty member at the University of British Columbia, I first met Roberta Park at HISPA: the International Association for the History of Physical Education and Sport7 in Glasgow in 1985 and was immediately smitten with her warmth, extensive circle of friends and admirers, and deep knowledge of sport and physical education history (Vertinsky, 2003). We shared the same passionate interest in the history of women and sport and a similar background in our training as physical educators and educational historians. I found in her a mentor for life in my research activities around the many dimensions of the history of health, medicine, and physical education, as well as a long-standing friend and confidante.

Robbie, as we called her, was widely considered to be among the leading sport historians in the world. She won a string of awards for her academic excellence in sport history, including the D.B. Dill Historical Lecture, American College of Sports Medicine; the Reet Howell Memorial Address, Australian Society for Sport History; the Distinguished Scholar Award, National Association for Physical Education in Higher Education; the Alliance Scholar, American Alliance for Health and Physical Education; International Sport History Scholar Award; Seward C. Staley Honor Address, North American Society for Sport History; Fellow of the American Academy of Kinesiology (now NAK); and Fellow of the British Society for Sports History. She is sorely missed, but her influence is sustained through her valuable archival collections distributed to various locations, library collections containing the sheer volume of her published work, and the memories of those who benefited from and contributed to her remarkable career as sport historian and physical educator.8

Notes

1.

“Too few physical education departments” she would later complain, “require their major students to study history, and part of the responsibility for the impoverished state of history within physical education belongs to those colleagues who mistakenly believe that intellectual rigor is the exclusive prerogative of experimental science” (Park, 2002, p. 97).

2.

No longer existing as a stand-alone academic department, it exists now only in part in the Department of Integrative Biology. The physical activity program, which in many ways was the origin of the department, remains. Indeed, there are no free-standing kinesiology degree programs among the 10 University of California campuses—pieces of former departments continue at UCLA and perhaps elsewhere recast as rehabilitative medicine, physical therapy, or in the broader home disciplines of psychology or biology.

3.

It was time, she said, to recapture something akin to the shared vison that motivated early leaders of the profession.

4.

Indeed, as early as 1960, 42 leading scholars from such fields as physiology, psychology, and physical medicine had produced a mosaic of the entire field of exercise and sports in Science and Medicine of Exercise and Sports.

5.

See also Park’s (1993a) monograph for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Measurement of Physical Fitness: A Historical Perspective, where she overviewed the most influential studies on fitness over the last 100 years. Her report also underscored the growing inability of the physical education professional groups to agree on fitness-testing approaches, which led to dedicated professionals turning elsewhere such as the AMA and ACSM.

6.

In 1994 she addressed a symposium sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to discuss her work on the history of fitness, and in 1994 and 1995 she addressed the American College of Sports Medicine.

7.

HISPA, the International Association for the History of Physical Education and Sport, was founded in Zurich in 1973. In 1989 HISPA merged with ICOSH, the International Committee for the History of Sport and Physical Education, to become ISHPES, the International Society for the History of Physical Education and Sport.

8.

Her work and the archival material she collected now reside in various places, including at the H.J. Lutcher Stark Center for Physical Culture and Sports at the University of Texas, Austin.

References

  • Berryman, J., & Park, R.J. (Eds.). (1992). Essays in the history of sports medicine. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

  • Brooks, G., Li-Jue, S., & Zieff, S. (2019). In memoriam, Roberta J Park, professor of integrative biology, emerita. UC Berkeley, 1931–2018. https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/in-memoriam/files/roberta-park.html

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mangan, J.A. (2009). Prologue: Roberta J. Park, polymathic and polymorphic pioneer: A personal appreciation. International Journal of the History of Sport, 24(12), 15011507. doi:10.1080/09523360701627637

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1977a). High-protein diets, “damaged hearts,” and rowing men: Antecedents of modern sports medicine and exercise science, 1867–1928. In J.O. Holloszy (Ed.), Exercise and sport sciences reviews (pp. 137169). Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1977b). Human energy expenditure from Australopithecus afarensis to the 4-minute mile: Exemplars and case studies. In J.O. Holloszy (Ed.), Exercise and sport sciences reviews (pp. 185220). Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1981). The emergence of the academic discipline of physical education in the United States. In G.A. Brooks (Ed.), Perspectives on the academic discipline of physical education (pp. 2045). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1987). The future of graduate education in the sociocultural foundations: History, Quest, 39(2), 191200. doi:10.1080/00336297.1987.10483872

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1989). The second hundred years: Can physical education become the renaissance field of the 21st century? Quest, 41(1), 127. doi:10.1080/00336297.1989.10483905

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1991). On tilting at windmills while facing Armageddon. Quest, 43(3), 247259. doi:10.1080/00336297.1991.10484029

  • Park, R.J. (1993a). Measurement of physical fitness: A historical perspective. ODPHP monograph series. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J., & Hult, J. (1993b). Women as leaders in physical education and school based sports, 1865 to the 1930s. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 64(3), 3540. doi:10.1080/07303084.1993.10606726

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1994a). A decade of the body: Researching and writing about the history of health, fitness, exercise and sport, 1983–1993. Journal of Sport History, 21(2), 5982.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1994b). A long and productive career: Franklin M. Henry—scientist, mentor, pioneer. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 65(4), 295307. doi:10.1080/02701367.1994.10607633

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1995). History of research on physical activity and health: Selected topics. Quest, 47(3), 274287. doi:10.1080/00336297.1995.10484157

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1996). Sport history in the 1990s: Prospects and problems. American Academy of Physical Education Papers, 20. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1998). A house divided. Quest, 50(2), 213224. doi:10.1080/00336297.1998.10484281

  • Park, R.J. (2002). Back then gloves really did have pockets: Thanks dad for my career and life’s values. Aethlon: The Journal of Sport Literature, 19(2), 8998.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (Cummins, J., Ed.). (2010). Oral histories on the management of intercollegiate athletics at UC Berkeley: 1960–2014. Berkeley: The Bancroft Library, University of California.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (2011). Women as leaders: What women have attained in and through the field of physical education. In R.J. Park & P. Vertinsky (Eds.), Women, sport, society: Further reflections, reaffirming Mary Wollstonecraft (pp. 166193). London, UK, and New York, NY: Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J., Brooks, G.A., & Scott, K.M. (1993). In memoriam, Franklin M. Henry, professor of physical education emeritus, UC Berkeley, 1904–1993. https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/inmemoriam/html/rranklinmhenry.html

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Smith, B.G. (1998). The gender of history: Men, women and historical practice. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Solomon, H.A. (1984). The exercise myth. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

  • Vertinsky, P. (1994). Gender relations, women’s history and sport history: A decade of changing enquiry, 1983–1993. Journal of Sport History, 21(1), 124.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Vertinsky, P. (2003). Roberta J. Park and the impossible dream: Keeping it together for physical education and the academy. Journal of Sport History, 30(1), 7399.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Vertinsky, P. (2017). A question of the head and the heart: From physical education to kinesiology in the gymnasium and the laboratory. Kinesiology Review, 6(2), 140152. doi:10.1123/kr.2017-0006

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wilmore, J.H. (1998). Building strong academic programs for our future. Quest, 50(2), 103107. doi:10.1080/00336297.1998.10484266

  • Wrynn, A.M. (2019, May 29). Did we need a Renaissance or Reformation? Considering Roberta Park’s analysis of the discipline of physical education’s first 100 years [Paper presentation]. North American Society for Sport History Annual Convention, Boise, ID.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Vertinsky is with the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. Wrynn is with the Office of the Chancellor, California State University, Long Beach, CA, USA.

Vertinsky (patricia.vertinsky@ubc.ca) is corresponding author.
  • Berryman, J., & Park, R.J. (Eds.). (1992). Essays in the history of sports medicine. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

  • Brooks, G., Li-Jue, S., & Zieff, S. (2019). In memoriam, Roberta J Park, professor of integrative biology, emerita. UC Berkeley, 1931–2018. https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/in-memoriam/files/roberta-park.html

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mangan, J.A. (2009). Prologue: Roberta J. Park, polymathic and polymorphic pioneer: A personal appreciation. International Journal of the History of Sport, 24(12), 15011507. doi:10.1080/09523360701627637

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1977a). High-protein diets, “damaged hearts,” and rowing men: Antecedents of modern sports medicine and exercise science, 1867–1928. In J.O. Holloszy (Ed.), Exercise and sport sciences reviews (pp. 137169). Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1977b). Human energy expenditure from Australopithecus afarensis to the 4-minute mile: Exemplars and case studies. In J.O. Holloszy (Ed.), Exercise and sport sciences reviews (pp. 185220). Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1981). The emergence of the academic discipline of physical education in the United States. In G.A. Brooks (Ed.), Perspectives on the academic discipline of physical education (pp. 2045). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1987). The future of graduate education in the sociocultural foundations: History, Quest, 39(2), 191200. doi:10.1080/00336297.1987.10483872

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1989). The second hundred years: Can physical education become the renaissance field of the 21st century? Quest, 41(1), 127. doi:10.1080/00336297.1989.10483905

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1991). On tilting at windmills while facing Armageddon. Quest, 43(3), 247259. doi:10.1080/00336297.1991.10484029

  • Park, R.J. (1993a). Measurement of physical fitness: A historical perspective. ODPHP monograph series. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J., & Hult, J. (1993b). Women as leaders in physical education and school based sports, 1865 to the 1930s. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 64(3), 3540. doi:10.1080/07303084.1993.10606726

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1994a). A decade of the body: Researching and writing about the history of health, fitness, exercise and sport, 1983–1993. Journal of Sport History, 21(2), 5982.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1994b). A long and productive career: Franklin M. Henry—scientist, mentor, pioneer. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 65(4), 295307. doi:10.1080/02701367.1994.10607633

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1995). History of research on physical activity and health: Selected topics. Quest, 47(3), 274287. doi:10.1080/00336297.1995.10484157

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1996). Sport history in the 1990s: Prospects and problems. American Academy of Physical Education Papers, 20. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (1998). A house divided. Quest, 50(2), 213224. doi:10.1080/00336297.1998.10484281

  • Park, R.J. (2002). Back then gloves really did have pockets: Thanks dad for my career and life’s values. Aethlon: The Journal of Sport Literature, 19(2), 8998.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (Cummins, J., Ed.). (2010). Oral histories on the management of intercollegiate athletics at UC Berkeley: 1960–2014. Berkeley: The Bancroft Library, University of California.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J. (2011). Women as leaders: What women have attained in and through the field of physical education. In R.J. Park & P. Vertinsky (Eds.), Women, sport, society: Further reflections, reaffirming Mary Wollstonecraft (pp. 166193). London, UK, and New York, NY: Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Park, R.J., Brooks, G.A., & Scott, K.M. (1993). In memoriam, Franklin M. Henry, professor of physical education emeritus, UC Berkeley, 1904–1993. https://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/inmemoriam/html/rranklinmhenry.html

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Smith, B.G. (1998). The gender of history: Men, women and historical practice. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Solomon, H.A. (1984). The exercise myth. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

  • Vertinsky, P. (1994). Gender relations, women’s history and sport history: A decade of changing enquiry, 1983–1993. Journal of Sport History, 21(1), 124.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Vertinsky, P. (2003). Roberta J. Park and the impossible dream: Keeping it together for physical education and the academy. Journal of Sport History, 30(1), 7399.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Vertinsky, P. (2017). A question of the head and the heart: From physical education to kinesiology in the gymnasium and the laboratory. Kinesiology Review, 6(2), 140152. doi:10.1123/kr.2017-0006

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wilmore, J.H. (1998). Building strong academic programs for our future. Quest, 50(2), 103107. doi:10.1080/00336297.1998.10484266

  • Wrynn, A.M. (2019, May 29). Did we need a Renaissance or Reformation? Considering Roberta Park’s analysis of the discipline of physical education’s first 100 years [Paper presentation]. North American Society for Sport History Annual Convention, Boise, ID.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 196 195 133
PDF Downloads 128 128 74