Fitness Workers
There’s an old saying that the teacher learns more than the student and while I’m just the writer here (”just”: did you hear the old joke about the actress in Hollywood so dumb that she slept with the writer in the hope of getting a part? We’re not the highest regarded occupation you know, mere inches above politicians and economists on the ladder.) I’m certainly learning a lot from being here.
The BLS tells us that there’s 205,000 fitness workers in the US. That many? I knew a few Hollywood types had personal trainers and that there was the occasional gym about the place but that many? I guess the fitness revolution passed me by in more ways than one then.
The usual training is certification in whichever specific subset of the field you want to work in. Each field has its own certification body so working out exactly which one you want can be tricky. As is common in so much of American society these days there is an increasing movement towards asking for a college degree, perhaps in exercise science or physical education. There’s something ghoulish about the fact that over and above certification and that possible college degree, you’ll also need to show your skills in CPR: a constant worry is that you might allow people to overtrain.
As to our EQSQ personality tests I think the brain type being looked for here is fairly clear: female brain type or empathic. This is, after all, a job teaching people, motivating them, so it very much calls on the people skills side of the balance sheet.
August 27th, 2006 at 11:10 pm
Yes, at this stage in my life I, myself, would prefer an empathizing personal trainer. But there might be a place for those lacking in the empathizing category, don’t you think? When I was younger and involved in a great many varsity sports, I responded well to a clear-cut, you must do this to accomplish this, coaching style. Granted, I always hated that dreadful football coach who snipped, snapped, and barked, and was always grateful that HE was not my coach. But there is a sense, when driving the body to intense levels, that the body becomes a machine. In this way a systemizing approach to fitness makes sense. Not a mean, angry approach, but a systemizing one.
In my adulthood, even while active, I am not a marathoner, not a body-as-machine type. But there are plenty of those around. We see them under huge barbells in the gym and out running in 40 below weather and sprinting up mountains. I suspect many of these types might be appreciative of a cut-and-dry approach on how to make the body stronger, faster, more efficient. Think Billy Blanks.
August 31st, 2006 at 8:46 pm
The BLS classifications make a difference between a coach (someone running a team) and a fitness worker, so while I agree with your point, it’s sort of already taken care of.
In fact, thinking about it the two jobs take entirely different forms of intelligence to do well. The fitness worker is working with individuals (even if there are a group of them) to develop themselves, which is a completely different form of intelligence needed by a coach, who is attempting to prepare a system, the team, to operate effectively.
Which is why, I guess, that in the professional sports world the two jobs are separated. The fitness coach is not the team coach: they’re doing very different things.
September 1st, 2006 at 12:12 pm
Tim, Certainly, I prefer a trainer with the ability to relate and chat and motivate. However, I read in a fitness newsletter about the qualities of a good personal trainer, and a good few of the qualities seemed part of a systematic approach. For example, trainers perform evaluations of a client’s current fitness status, her current and past medical history, her physical strengths and weakness, and such. With this information, the trainer helps a client develop a systematic training program and helps the client keep up with the numbers (pounds, repetitions) associated with the plan. And, a trainer needs to think carefully–systematically–about each client, so the CPR can be avoided! To me, a balance brain type seems particularly suitable, with perhaps a leaning toward the more empathic personality. What do you think?
September 10th, 2006 at 5:25 pm
Ah, Millie, I think we’re actually arguing about the definition of the word systemizing here. What you are describing as it above to me sounds like basic intelligence. We’ll take a series of measurements and then apply known solutions to our results. One doesn’t need to be an empathizer or systemizer to do that, it’s as I say, a basic test of intelligence.
What I mean by systemizing (Hey, I’m the writer around here, yes? So it’s like the Red Queen, a word means what I want it to mean!) is the people who worked out what the actions should be for a given set of measurements in the first place. How many star jumps can a person do without ruining their knees? How many push ups is ideal?
So my definition of systemizing is more restrictive: exploring and designing the system, rather than simply using it.
October 18th, 2006 at 11:53 pm
For those entertaining the field of personal training as a potential occupation, I see both interpersonal and semi-scientific aspects to consider. I would suggest that possessing strengths in both the empathetic and systematic EQ test categories would be ideal for such a pairing.
While it may be less relevant than empathizing in this instance, systemizing would seem significant with regard to a trainer’s ability to integrate research into the creation of fitness programs. There is no ‘one’ theory of how to become physically fit, and thus the synthesis of current fitness approaches and styles into a structured regiment for individual clients must be a major aspect of being a valuable trainer. With regard to the empathetic, the accommodation and general comfort provided to individuals who may have little experience challenging their bodies in a fitness environment would be vital as well.
Assessing one’s own level of motivation is something I would consider in addition. I’ve been to several fitness certification conventions, and the level of enthusiasm is something to behold. I’ve been told by personal trainers at these events that decorating your resume is a key in the fitness industry, and with all the personal training organizations to be certified by–AFTA, ACE, IFPA, NETA and NGA among others–motivation appears to be a prerequisite.