Athletic testing 101

    I took the CSCS exam yesterday passed the Scientific portion but failed the practical/applied section (By two questions!). The exam on the practical side went better than I thought it would. I thought for sure I would bomb it given how little I looked over that side of the material. I took 24 hours to sulk about it, and now back to studying. I am more focused now since I know I am pretty close to passing and earning the certification. My score gives me an indication that how I am preparing is leading me down the right path. From now until I take the exam again, I'll read a few pages of the text, take some notes and build a post around that subject. Then any free time during the day I'll write down athlete statistics for bench, squat, power clean, vertical jump, etc. over and over until it becomes second nature. Now, that I am back on the studying grind this post will be more academic instead of personal.

    Why do we test? 

Simple

Assessment of athletic talent

Identify physical abilities

Identify areas of improvement.

    For athletics you need to perform at a baseline level physically in order to compete. Football players that aren't big, strong and fast do not exist. Or if they aren't physical monsters, they are mentally so far ahead that it overcomes the lack of physical traits (looking at you quarterbacks). Basketball is the same way. Even the worst player on the court is still an athletic marvel. Baseball works a little different as players are the athletic freaks like in football and baseball. For Baseball other factors of athletic talent are measured-For pitchers, how fast can you throw? how accurate are you? You could do this for every sport. You have to have a baseline athletic floor. In the military we test to assess your level of fitness (more on this later). Physical abilities are more focused on what you are able to do within the sport itself. How is your route running? (American Football receiver), how many three pointers can you make? (Basketball). Improvement is self-explanatory-yes, you are big and strong, but can you run? Even if your a line of scrimmage player in American Football how is your acceleration? ACFT scores in the Army are a nice baseline in determining what events could use some work? Low Standing Power throw? Do more plyometrics. Hand release pushups need work. Do more chest and shoulder muscular endurance work. 

    Now that we know why we test, we have to look at certain aspects of the test themselves. Does it measure what it is supposed to measure? How valid are these tests? Do they measure what is supposed to measure? For the Army the ACFT does a pretty good job at measuring all aspects of fitness. If you look at Validity as a tree. Each branch has an underlying issue. 

    Construct validity is the ability of a test to represent the underlying issue. If we want to know fitness levels for Soldiers, then ACFT is conducted. It has to measure abilities important for that sport or in our example military applications. Face Validity is the appearance from the user that the test measures what it is supposed to measure. One of the biggest complaints about the APFT (Army Physical Fitness Test) was that is only measured muscular endurance and aerobic endurance (2 min of pushups, 2 min of sit-ups and 2-mile run). If the participant feels like it is an appropriate test, then more enthusiasm and effort will be put into the test. This is measured informally and objective. Content validity is assessments by experts that the test covers all abilities in appropriate proportions. For example, if a group of PhD's in Exercise Science (or related field) were to watch a test and they make the assessment that the test is valid then its valid. Apart of this process is the test developer make a list of components to be assessed then ensure that they are tested. 

    Criterion-referenced validity is the extent to which test scores are associated with some other measure of the same ability. Within Criterion-referenced validity Concurrent, convergent and predictive validity all play factors. Concurrent is the extent to which test scores are associated with other accepted tests that measure the same ability. Looking at aerobic capacity does the 2-mile run and a 1.5 mile run measure the same ability? If we can pull Vo2 max stats from a 2-mile run, can we pull it from a 1.5-mile run? Often times concurrent validity is measured statistically. Convergent validity is the correlation between the test implemented and the "Gold Standard" of a test. If the true test of Vo2 max is performed in a lab with equipment, can we measure it with a 2-mile run? This can be determined with time, talent and tools. If we do not have the tools or the professionals to run a lab test for Vo2 max, then a 2-mile run is sufficient. Predictive validity is the extent to which the test corresponds with future behavior or performance. This is the NFL combine in a nutshell. Thousands of scouts watch the combine in hope the battery of tests outline predict a good NFL player.

    Lastly, Discriminant validity ensures that the test(s) outlines avoid unnecessary expenditures of time, energy and resources. For example, if we were to measure maximum upper body strength would we test bench press and shoulder press in the same day? Most likely we would not. Or if the test eats up an entire day, we will most likely look to shorten the test.