ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 95 review article UDC: 796.01 received: 2010-06-14 BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA Weimo ZHU 1 1 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Kinesiology & Community Health, 205 Freer Hall, MC-052, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. e-mail: weimozhu@illinois.edu ABSTRACT The term “Kinesmetrics” was coined by Weimo Zhu in 1999 when he created a new doctoral program at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC), USA, with a focus to “develop and apply measurement theory, statistics and mathematical analysis to the fi eld of Kinesiology.” Since then, a number of Ph.D. scholars in Ki- nesmetrics have been trained at UIUC, which also regularly hosts visiting scholars from all over the world. In fall 2008, a new Kinesmetrics program was established at the Middle Tennessee State University by Minsoo Kang, a UIUC Kinesmetrics Ph.D. graduate, and the International Forum of Kinesiometrics was held at the University of Primorska in Koper, Slovenia, in 2009. Meanwhile, Kinesmetrics scholars/programs in the USA are experiencing many challenges, e.g., reduced faculty positions, limited funding resources, a variety of data characteristics and measurement issues due to the interdisciplinary nature of Kinesiology, etc. After a brief review of the historical back- ground and foundation of Kinesmetrics, this paper focused on the current challenges faced by Kinesmetrics, as a subdiscipline within Kinesiology, and how these challenges can best be addressed. Future directions of Kinesmetrics were also outlined. Keywords: kineziometrics, development, new program, challenge ROJSTVO, RAST IN IZZIVI “KINEZMETRIKE” V ZDA IZVLEČEK Termin “kinezmetrika” (ang.; slo. kineziometrija) je leta 1999 skoval Weimo Zhu, ko je ustanavljal nov doktorski študij na Univerzi v Illinoisu (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, UIUC) v ZDA s ciljem razviti in uporabiti merilno teorijo, statis- tiko in matematično analizo na področju kineziologije. Od tedaj se je na UIUC izobra- zilo mnogo doktorjev kinezmetrike. UIUC tudi redno gostuje znanstvenike s celega sve- ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 96 ta. Jeseni 2008 je Minsoo Kang, ki je doktoriral iz kinezmetrike na UIUCC, ustanovili nov program kinezmetrike na državni univerzi Middle Tennessee State University. V letu 2009 pa je bil na Univerzi na Primorskem v Kopru organiziran mednarodni znan- stveni sestanek Kineziometrija. Medtem so tako znanstveniki s področja kinezmetrike kot sami študijski programi v ZDA postavljeni pred mnoge izzive, kot so zmanjšano število učiteljskih mest na fakultetah, zmanjšano fi nanciranje, različne vrste podatk- ov in meritev zaradi interdisciplinarne narave kineziologije, in podobno. Po kratkem pregledu zgodovinskega ozadja kinezmetrike, se članek osredotoči na trenutne izzive kinezmetrike kot veje kineziologije in na možne načine spopadanja z njimi. Prav tako poudari smernice v kinezmetriki za prihodnost. Ključne besede: kinezmetrika, razvoj, novi program, izziv BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA “Whatever exists at all exists in some amount. To know it thoroughly involves knowing its quantity as well as its quality” (Thorndike, 1918, 16). This is also true in understanding human movement. To be able to measure and evaluate what is of interest in human movement is an important part of Kinesiology, a discipline or study that was initially called “physical education,” then “exercise science.” Kinesmetrics is a subdis- cipline in Kinesiology with a focus on studying measurement and evaluation. While the term was introduced more than a decade ago, it is still unknown to many professionals in Kinesiology, especially colleagues outside of North America. The purpose of this paper is to introduce Kinesmetrics, including its birth, historical background and foun- dation, current status and challenges, and future directions. BIRTH OF “KINESMETRICS” Shortly after I took a position with the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC), USA, in 1999, I decided to create a new doctoral program in measurement and evaluation. I was struggling with what to name the program. I fi rst thought to sim- ply call it “Measurement and Evaluation,” but quickly gave that name up since it was too general. So, I did some literature searches and through those readings I realized that measurement in Kinesiology has been struggling for a unique name, as well as its own subdiscipline status, for a long time. A number of alternative names (e.g., “physi- cal edumetrics” and “psychomotormetric”), in fact, had been proposed (Safrit, 1989). Considering “Kinesiology’ is known as a general term to represent the study of human Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 97 movement and “metrics” has long been used in many disciplines as their quantitative focus (e.g., “biometrics” in biology, “econometrics” in economics, and “psychomet- rics” in psychology, etc.), I coined the term “Kinesmetrics.” It was defi ned as a disci- pline “intended to develop and apply measurement theory, statistics and mathematical analysis to the fi eld of Kinesiology.” The knowledge basis and the theoretical foundation of Kinesmetrics includes six categories: (a) Measurement theory, (b) Statistical/mathematical methods, (c) Research design, (d) Data characteristics and measurement issues in a subdiscipline, (e) Legal and ethical issues of measurement and research, and (f) Computers and technology. More detailed descriptions of these categories can be found in Table 1. Table 1: Knowledge Basis and Theoretical Foundation of Kinesmetrics. Category Description Measurement theory Any well-developed test or measure is based on a meas- urement theory model. The procedures for estimating the key characteristics of the test or measure, such as valid- ity and reliability, are dictated by the model. Each model has a unique set of assumptions and is based on a statisti- cal or mathematical model. Mathematical and statistical theories used to derive these procedures are referred to as measurement theories. Classical test theory and item re- sponse theory are two familiar examples of such theories. Statistical/mathematical methods The statistical method is one of the mathematical methods, as well as one of the most important scientifi c approach- es, used to assist researchers in describing/modeling data, drawing inferences from data, and studying causal rela- tionships. According to their designed purposes, statisti- cal methods can be classifi ed as descriptive or inferential statistics; according to their characteristics, they can also be classifi ed as parametric or nonparametric, univariate or multivariate statistics, etc. ANOVA, correlation, discrimi- nant function analysis, regression, and structural equating modeling are just a few examples of a huge pool of exist- ing methods. Research design Research design refers to the methods developed for the discovery and confi rmation of causal relationships among variables. In addition to covering the general knowledge of experiments, such as single-factor, factorial, multifac- toral, balanced lattice and incomplete block designs, it ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 98 Category Description includes other important issues or topics involved in de- signing a study, such as sampling, research procedures, subject selection, and principles of analyzing data and re- porting results. Data characteristics/ measurement issues in a subdiscipline Kinesiology is a multidisciplinary study of human movements and its major subdisciplines include physical education, exercise science, sports nutrition, physical activity epidemiology, biomechanics, exercise and sports psychology, motor behavior, athletic training, sport history, sport sociology, and sports administration, etc. Data characteristics and measurement issues are of- ten different from one subdiscipline to another. For ex- ample, typically data collected in physical education are clustered in a hierarchical structure and many measures in exercise science experiments are taken repeatedly. To analyze these data appropriately, a good understanding of the nature of these characteristics and issues is required. Legal and ethical issues Decisions made, based on a test or measure, and the re- sults of a research study have consequences on people’s lives. To ensure a test is fairly designed and a research study is conducted ethically, basic knowledge about legal and ethical issues related to research and measurement is essential. Computer/technology Computers and technology have changed our lives, as well as measurement practices. General knowledge of computers (hardware and software), tech- nological measurement equipment, and measurement and statistical programs are necessary for any Kinesmetrician. A good understanding of the latest technologies and their potential applications to improve measurement practices is also essential. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND FOUNDATION OF “KINESMETRICS” “The history of science is largely coextensive with the history of measurement” (Tryon, 1991, p.1). This is true for measurement practice in Kinesiology. While the term “Kinesmetrics” is relatively new, it was developed based on a long and rich his- tory of measurement practice in the fi eld of physical education and exercise science. In fact, according to Safrit (1989), the history of measurement can be traced back to Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 99 the late 1800s although many of the early works focused only on the measurement of physical dimensions of the human body. Tables 2 and 3 summarize some examples of early developments in applied and theoretical measurement in Kinesiology described by Safrit (1989). Table 2: Selected Early Examples of “Applied Measurement” in Kinesiology (Safrit, 1989). Type Year Key Person(s)/Events Physical Type 1861 Hitchcock developed standards of age, height, and weight and of chest, arm and forearm girths Strength 1870s Sargent developed the Intercollegiate Strength Test 1925 Rogers developed the Strength Index and Physi- cal Fitness Index 1948 Clarke developed cable tensiometer test Cardiorespiratory Function 1905 Crampton developed the Blood Ptosis Test, the fi rst test of cardiac function 1920s Schneider designed a test to determine fatigue and physical function for fl ying 1931 Tuttle modifi ed a block-step test known as “Tuttle Pulse-Ratio Test” to measure endurance and the general state of training 1943 Brouha et al. developed the well-known Harvard Step Test 1954 Balke developed Balke Treadmill Test Sport Skills 1913 Athletic Badge Tests by the Playground and Rec- reation Association of America 1924 Brace developed tests to measure fundamental skills for a specifi c sport 1938 Glassow and Broer published a book devoted to skills tests and batteries Physical Fitness 1954 Kraus-Weber Test was developed to measure min- imal function of the low back area 1976 AAHPERD developed the Youth Fitness Test ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 100 Type Year Key Person(s)/Events 1980 AAHPERD developed the Health-Related Physi- cal Fitness Test 1987 Institute for Aerobic Research developed FIT- NESSGRAM 1987 President’s Council and Chrysler/AAU published revised version of fi tness tests 1988 AAHPERD developed Physical Best program General Motor Ability 1894 Normal School of Gymnastics and Gymnastics Societies administered test battery to measure jumping, climbing etc. 1930s Test batteries to measure basic motor ability Knowledge Test 1987 McGee and Farrow reproduced many knowledge tests in physical education in a book format. Table 3: Selected Early Examples of “Theoretical Measurement” in Kinesiology (Sa- frit, 1989). Year Key Person(s)/Events 1947 Alexander used trend analysis for repeated measured data 1958 Feldt and McKee introduced ANOVA for reliability analysis 1972 Hale and Hale introduced two theoretical models for measuring changes 1974 Schutz introduced measures of error in motor control 1975 Disch et al. introduced and used factor analysis 1976 Safrit et al. introduced the reliability theory, including generalizability theory 1977 Safrit introduced criterion-referenced measurement theory and methods 1977 Safrit et al. introduced and used multivariate techniques for construct validity 1984 Wood and Safrit introduced a multivariate approach for test battery’s reliabil- ity analysis 1985 Safrit et al. introduced sequential testing 1986 Safrit et al. introduced meta-analytic techniques 1987 Spray, along with Disch, Safrit and Wood, introduced item response theory Role of measurement in the fi eld Like Exercise Physiology, Exercise/Sport Psychology, Motor Development/Learn- ing, Sports Medicine, Pedagogy, etc., Kinesmetrics is a subdiscipline in Kinesiology. With a few exceptions (e.g., Judith Spray from ACT), most measurement specialists Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 101 work in university settings. Similar to other faculty, measurement specialists’ responsi- bilities include teaching, research and service. In addition, most measurement special- ists serve as a consultant for colleagues and students in their units in regards to research design, statistical data analysis and grant proposal preparations. Doctoral training in measurement To be able to serve as a subdiscipline in the fi eld and conduct measurement related research, being able to continuously prepare and supply “new blood” into the fi eld is a must. Training new doctoral students is therefore necessary. Fortunately, training measurement specialists also has a rich history in North America. Many well-known universities/colleges, such as Indiana University, Springfi eld College, University of British Columbia, University of Colorado, University of Georgia, University of Hou- ston, University of Iowa, and University of Wisconsin, had doctoral programs to train measurement specialists. The number of active programs at a given time, however, varied. For example, only fi ve programs, i.e., University of Wisconsin, University of Georgia, University of Houston, University of British Columbia and Springfi eld Col- lege, actively trained doctoral students in measurement in the 1980s. For a more his- torical review on doctoral training in measurement, see “a genealogy” developed by Baumgartner and Safrit (2003). Professional organization An active professional organization is essential for the survival and growth of any discipline. This is also true for Kinesmetrics. The Measurement & Evaluation (M&E) Council has played an active role in the development of Kinesmetrics as a subdisci- pline. According to Baumgartner (2006), Measurement and Evaluation was a section within the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAHPERD) structure from 1949 through 1972 and became a council in 1973. Cur- rently, it is one of 11 councils in the American Association for Physical Activity and Recreation, which is one of the six associations in AAHPERD. In addition to organ- izing programs at each year’s AAHPERD national convention, the M&E Council has been actively involved in many major national measurement related projects. The de- velopment and participation in the 1958 AAHPERD Youth Fitness Test, 1980 AAH- PERD Health-Related Fitness Test and the revision and expansion of the AAHPERD Sports Skills Test series from 1984 to 1991 are just a few examples. In addition, the M&E Council has organized its own M&E Symposium held every 3-4 years. Starting from 1975, 11 symposiums have been held and valuable information was presented at and published from these symposiums. Baumgartner (1992) has provided a summary on the fi rst six symposiums. ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 102 Looking back, several notable characteristics have been observed in the early de- velopment of Kinesmetrics. First, measurement was recognized as a subdiscipline a long time ago and has been an important part of Kinesiology’s knowledge base. Sec- ond, measurement specialists have been well trained and active in introducing new theories and methods to the fi eld. As an example, just four years after the theory of generalizability was introduced (Cronbach, Gleser, & Nanda, 1972), it was already be- ing applied and promoted in Kinesiology by Safrit et al. (1976). As another example, while the item response theory (IRT) was introduced to the fi eld more than 20 years ago (Spray, 1987), it is still considered a “new” testing theory in the fi eld of behavior medicine (Baranowski, 2006). As a result, professionals in Kinesiology, in general, are well trained in terms of measurement and statistical knowledge and skills. Third, measurement has been a “minority” subdiscipline for a long time. Usually, there is only one, if any, measurement faculty member in a Kinesiology department. Finally, most measurement research has been of the “applied” nature and there has been a lack of our own theoretical measurement research (Safrit, 1989). CURRENT STATUS AND CHALLENGES OF KINESMETRICS Many changes have occurred since Safrit’s review two decades ago, and the most notable changes include kinesiology’s evolution into an interdisciplinary fi eld of study, the information and technology revolutions, reducing budgets in higher education and the reduction in quality of measurement training. Many challenges have arisen because of these changes, which are briefl y described below. Kinesiology as an interdisciplinary fi eld For many years, “physical education” was the “big umbrella” for most professions who studied human movement. The emergence of new subdisciplines within the fi eld in the 1970s and 80s, such as exercise physiology, sports nutrition, physical activity epidemiology, athletic training, exercise and sports psychology, motor behavior, sports history, and sports sociology, quickly changed this. Various labels have been used for this “new” fi eld, Exercise Science, Human Movement, Human Performance, etc. to name just a few. Fortunately, “Kinesiology,” the study of human movement, has be- come the accepted broad label (Newell, 1990). In fact, Kinesiology as a fi eld is now in its best historical moment because of the worldwide obesity epidemic and the well- documented positive role of physical activity on health. The nature of interdisciplinary fi elds, however, brings three major challenges to measurement specialist in Kinesiol- ogy. First, data varies to a much greater degree than in other fi elds, such as in education or education psychology, in which most data are dichotomous or polychotomous. In contrast, all kinds of data formats, from dichotomous to continuous, can be found in Ki- Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 103 nesiology. Second, to be able to effectively develop an appropriate research design and analyze the data using the best fi t techniques, one must understand the nature/content of a subdiscipline. To do so, a measurement specialist must know, or at least be familiar with the subdiscipline. While knowing one or two subdisciplines may not be a huge challenge, mastering so many subdisciplines within a discipline becomes very diffi cult to impossible. Finally, because of rapidly increasing knowledge content in the fi eld, the competition for required courses has become intensive. The traditionally required measurement course at the undergraduate level often becomes an elective one at many universities and now few Kinesiology graduate programs provide their own graduate level measurement course. Information and technology revolution There is no question that information and technology have changed our lives, in- cluding the function of measurement specialists in Kinesiology. On the positive side, never before have we had such convenient access to information about new theories and methods from our spawning disciplines, such as psychometrics and statistics. In addition, it is easier now to generate and access huge, multi-dimensional data sets through the internet and super-computing which helps address problems that could not be examined before. For example, through a combination of global positioning system (GPS) and objective physical activity monitors, we were able to easily track and study a person’s physical activity space to help understand the interaction between physical activity and environment and social context (Zhu, 2003). Rich data and strong comput- ing power also provide us new approaches to explore and analyze data. Techniques like data mining (Zhu & Maxwell, 2006) and bootstrapping/computer intensive statistical methods (Zhu, 1997) are just two examples. On the negative side of the ever changing information and technology world, we have to spend considerable time to consistently learn new methods and ways to process and manage the new information and technol- ogy. Because of the development of convenient measurement and statistical software, data analyses can be completed by a few simple clicks; thus, the measurement special- ist’s role is also changing. Instead of running the data analyses themselves, they spend more time providing guidance on how to appropriately run and interpret the data analy- ses or trying to limit the “garbage in, garbage out” practice, in which individuals blindly accept what the computer says. Reducing budget Because of economic constraints, funding for higher education has been constantly reduced. The negative impact on Kinesmetrics has been signifi cant. For example, when a measurement specialist retires, the position is often unfi lled or replaced by a grant- ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 104 generating faculty position. As a result of this practice, three well-known doctoral pro- grams in North America, i.e., University of British Columbia, University of Houston, and University of Wisconsin-Madison, were closed after their measurement professors’ retired or left. The pressure to pursue external grants has grown so much greater that measurement specialists have to spend considerable time seeking funding and devel- oping studies to support their own applied measurement research. As a result, limited energy and resources are devoted on theoretical research related to Kinesmetrics. Reduced quality in Kinesmetrics training Because of the above changes and associated negative impact, instruction and train- ing in Kinesmetrics are reducing. Most undergraduate measurement courses are now taught by non-measurement specialists; few universities provide Kinesiology focused graduate level measurement courses; and there are fewer measurement doctoral pro- grams available. As a result, there is an overall concern about the quality of the training of students and researchers in Kinesiology. As an example, there is widespread abuse of “p<.05,” in which the “signifi cance” of a study is merely based on how small a p-value was generated from a statistical software although it could be biased by the sample size employed in a study (Zhu, 2010). As another example, a recent survey of measurement practice in exercise and sport psychology found that many advanced theories and meth- ods developed in last two decades in psychometrics or educational measurement, such as IRT, differential item function analysis, computerized adaptive testing, etc., have been ignored by the fi eld of exercise and sport psychology (Zhu, in press). MEETING CHALLENGES AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS The challenges to Kinesmetrics are strong and real. Between giving up and facing/ addressing the challenges, the latter is the only choice. Two quotes by Safrit below (1983, p. 10), though made over 30 years ago (note: original quotes were published in 1979), are still true today: - What does the future hold for the measurement specialist in physical education? Is this specialist destined to serve as the corner druggist in a small town – dispensing information on available tests, writing prescriptions for the development new tests, and educating each new generation of consumers on the basics of test theory? Cer- tainly these are worthwhile endeavors, but other dimensions of measurement also merit attention. - Over fi fty years history (note: more than 80 years now!) should be enough to con- vince us that the measurement theoretician outside of our fi eld does not have suf- fi cient interest in our measurement problems to make a signifi cant contribution to their resolution. Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 105 Wood (1989) called for change to meet the challenges: - Change is natural, change is necessary, and change is volatile. The challenge for the 1990s is planning and coping with change. If we fail to meet this challenge, the only applause we will hear is the sound of one hand clapping. (p. 106–107). - Looney (1997) called for meeting the challenges by conducting “home” improve- ments fi rst. Specially, she called for measurement specialists to: (a) keep exploring new measurement theories and methods, such as IRT and Rasch analysis, to get our tools up to date and varied, and (b) increase communications and collabora- tions with other subdisciplines within the fi eld. Baumgartner (2007) called for more research to determine solutions to measurement problems in health and human per- formance. In fact, some signifi cant efforts have been made to respond to these calls and the following are a few examples. New measurement journal With the leadership of Ted A. Baumgartner, a measurement journal “Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science” was created in 1997. It is now published by Taylor & Francis Ltd . The journal serves as an excellent scholarly resource focusing on the issues of Kinesmetrics. New Kinesmetrics graduate programs The fi rst “Kinesmetrics” doctoral program was created at UIUC. The course work and learning experience was based on the six-category knowledge base and theoretical foundation described earlier, including measurement theory, statistical/mathematical methods, research design, data characteristics/measurement issues in the subdiscipline, the legal and ethical issues of measurement and research, and computers and technol- ogy. Table 4 lists some course examples in these categories. Since then, a number of Kinesmetric Ph.D. scholars have trained at UIUC and our Kinesmetrics Lab regularly hosts visiting scholars from all over the world. In fall 2008, a new Kinesmetrics pro- gram was established by Dr. Minsoo Kang, a UIUC Ph.D. graduate, at the Middle Ten- nessee State University. Table 4: Examples of course in UIUC Kinesmetrics’ doctoral program. Course # Name and credit Measurement Theory (3 units) EPSY 520 Use of Tests in Consulting, 1 Unit EPSY 585A Theories of Measurement (CTT), 1 Unit* EPSY 585B Theories of Measurement (IRT), 1 Unit* ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 106 Course # Name and credit KIN 594 Advanced Measurement Concepts in Kinesiology, 1 Unit* PSYC 506 Psychological Scaling: Unidimensional Methods, 1 Unit** PSYC 509 Psychological Scaling: Multidimensional Methods, 1 Unit** PSYC 531 Psychological Measurement in Industry, 1 Unit** SP ED 424 Tests and Measurements in Special Education** Statistics (3 units) CHLH 463 Statistical Techniques in Epidemiological Research, 1 Unit** EPSY 581 Multivariate Correlational Tech. in Educational Research, 1 Unit* EPSY 588 Covariance Structure and Factor Models, 1 Unit* EPSY 590 Hierarchical Linear Modeling** EPSY 584 Multivariate Analysis in Psychology and Education, 1 Unit* EPSY 580 Statistical Methods in Education, 1 Unit EPSY 582 Advanced Statistical Methods in Education, 1 Unit** STAT 424 Analysis of Variance, 1 Unit STAT 425 Applied Regression and Design, 1 Unit STAT 426 Sampling and Categorical Data, 1 Unit** STAT 428 Statistical Computing, 1 Unit STAT 429 Time Series Analysis, 1 Unit** STAT 458 Mathematical Modeling in Life, 1 Unit STAT 510 Mathematical Statistics, I, 1 Unit STAT 511 Mathematical Statistics, II, 1 Unit STAT 525 Current Research in Applied and Computational Statistics, 1 Unit** STAT 571 Multivariate Analysis, 1 Unit VP 650 Epidemiology, ½ Unit VP 524 Biostatistics, 1 Unit Research Design/Methods (2 units) CHLT 578 Applied Epidemiology, 1 Unit** EPSY 471 Evaluation Methods, 3 hours, 1 Unit EPSY 583 Single Subject Research Design, 1 Unit** KIN 494 Qualitative Research in Education EPSY 577 Methods of Qualitative Research, 1 Unit LA 564 Methods of Social/Behav. Research in Designed Environments, 1 Unit PSYC 332 Research Methods in Social Psychology: Laboratory Method, 1Unit* PSYC 333 Research Methods in Social Psychology: Natural Settings, 1 Unit* PSYC 435 Mathematical Formulations in Psychological Theory, 1 Unit SOC 480 Methods of Field Research, 1 Unit SOC 481 Survey Research, I, 1 Unit SOC 488 Demographic Methods, 1 Unit SOC 582 Survey Research Methods, II, 1 Unit Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 107 Course # Name and credit Computers CS 110 Programming Laboratory (Section CP), 1 Unit** CS 225 Data Structure and Software Principles, 1 Unit CS 300 Data Structure for Noncomputer Majors, 2 hours (1/2 unit)** EPSY 457 Computer Use in Education, 3 hours, 1 Unit General Areas CHLH 540 Health Behavior: Theoretical Perspectives, 1 Unit KIN 455 Quantitative Analysis of Human Motion, 3 hours, 1 Unit KIN 459 Physical Activity and Aging, 3 hours, 1 Unit KIN 590 Independent Study SP ED 510 Legal Aspects of Disabilities, 1 Unit Dissertation KIN 599 Dissertation research, 8 Units* Note. * required, **strongly recommended, 1 Unit = 3 or 4 credit hours. New graduate text Edited by Wood and Zhu and contributions by a team of 22 top scholars in the fi eld, a new graduate level measurement text “Measurement Theory and Practice in Kinesi- ology” was published in 2006. It consists of four parts (measurement basics, current issue in measurement, advanced statistical techniques, and measurement practice) and 16 chapters. It provides an update on the current knowledge basis and foundation of Kinesmetrics. As noted by Baumgartner (2007, 212), the book “just like the Safrit and Wood (1989) book, showcases measurement research. Undoubtedly, it will increase the quality and quantity of measurement research in health and human performance.” Reaching out to other subdisciplines Between the 1st and 7th Measurement and Evaluation symposium, the topics and contents of the symposium were mainly on measurement itself. Starting from the 8th symposium in 1996, Terry M. Wood, who organized the symposium at the Oregon State University, made a signifi cant change by inviting experts from other subdisci- plines in Kinesiology to discuss the challenging measurement issues they faced and by partnering them with measurement specialists to respond to the issues. Supported by the Cooper Institute and organized by James Morrow and Steven Blair, the 9th M&E symposium went even further by focusing on a single critical measurement problem or theme in the fi eld. Physical activity and related measurement issues were addressed at that symposium and the conference proceeding was published in a special supplement in Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport (Supplement 2, Vol. 71, 2000). Work- ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 108 ing jointly with the M&E Council and the American College of Sports Medicine, the Kinesmetrics Lab at UIUC has hosted two international Kinesmetrics conferences, one focused on measurement and research issues and challenges in aging in 2003, jointly with the 10th M&E symposium, and another on walking and health in 2005. Two pub- lications, a book (Zhu & Chodzko-Zajko, 2006) and a Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise supplement (July, 2008), were generated by the conferences. The 11th M&E symposium was held again jointly with the Cooper Institute in October 2007, with a focus on the diversity in physical activity and health. Addressing critical problems and issues in the fi eld Measurement specialists have also made signifi cant efforts to address critical meas- urement issues. Physical fi tness testing (Mood, Jackson, & Morrow, 2007; Morrow, Zhu, Franks, Meredith, & Spain, 2009; Zhu, Plowman, Park, 2010; see also a special is- sue in Measurement in Physical Education & Exercise Science, Vol. 12, Issue 3, 2008), physical activity (Kang, Marshall, Barreira, & Lee, 2009), national standard assessment (NASPE, 2008, 2010), assessing students’ learning in higher education (Zhu, 2007), promoting physical activity using the latest technology (Zhu, 2008), disability (Lee, Zhu, Hedrick, & Fernhall, 2010) and diversity (Gao & Zhu, in press) are just a few examples. Future directions Clearly, advances in Kinesiology cannot have been made without Kinesmetrics. Meanwhile, to survive, to keep growing, and to make meaningful contributions to the fi eld, Kinesmetrics scholars (Kinesmetricans!) need to create more doctoral programs in Kinesmetrics, improve instruction quality by taking advantage of new information technology (e.g., creating online undergraduate and graduate measurement courses), and to get involved in measurement and research issues critical to Kinesiology and society (e.g., physical activity and health, childhood obesity, fi tness testing, dose-re- sponse issues, construction of better and more convenient measures, online testing, the promotion of physical activity using new technology, etc.). As Baumgartner said (2007, 215), “The possibilities for measurement research are unlimited in terms of research questions, topics and research techniques.” It is a pleasure to see the concept of Kines- metrics being picked up around the world. A program of “Kinesmetrics” was estab- lished at the Korea National Sport University and the fi rst meeting of the International Forum of Kinesiometrics was held at the University of Primorska in Koper, Slovenia, May 21 and 22, 2009. Thus, Kinesmetrics is growing! Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 109 CONCLUSION Developed based on a long and rich history of measurement research and practice in the fi eld of Kinesiology, Kinesmetrics is a subdiscipline intended to develop and ap- ply measurement theory, statistics and mathematical analysis to Kinesiology. While the fi eld of Kinesmetrics has experienced ups and downs, its future should remain bright as long as kinesmetricans keep making “home improvements,” collaborating with other subdisciplines in the fi eld and being actively involved in addressing problems and is- sues critical to society and Kinesiology. Acknowledgement Some of the content of this paper was presented at the fi rst meeting of the Interna- tional Forum of Kinesiometrics and a recent newsletter by the M&E Council. REFERENCES Baranowski, T. (2006). Crisis and chaos in behavioral nutrition and physical activ- ity. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 3(27), DOI:10.1186/1479–5868–3–27. Baumgartner, T. (1992). History and background of measurement symposiums. In T. Baumgartner, & K. Wagoner (eds.), Psychomotor Measurement and Evaluation Past, Present, and Future: A Symposium in Honor of M. Jo Safrit’s Retirement (pp. 1–3). Athens, GA: The University of Georgia. Baumgartner, T. (2006). Measurement and Evaluation Council: Past, present, and fu- ture. In W. Zhu, & W. Chodzko-Zajko (eds.). Measurement issues in aging and physical activity: Proceedings of the 10th Measurement and Evaluation Symposium (pp. 137–143). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Baumgartner, T. (2007). Measurement research: Where have we been and where are we going? Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 11, 209–216. Baumgartner, T. A., & Safrit, M. J. (2003). A genealogy of measurement specialists in physical education and exercise science. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 7, 121–127. Cronbach, L. J., Gleser, G. C., Nanda, H., & Rajaratnam, N. (1972). The depend- ability of behavioral measurements: Theory of generalizability for scores and pro- fi les. New York: John Wiley. Gao, Y., & Zhu, W. (in press). Differential item functioning analysis of 2003–2004 NHANES physical activity questionnaire. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 110 Kang, M., Marshall, S. J., Barreira, T. V., & Lee, J. O. (2009). Effect of pedometer- based physical activity interventions: A meta-analysis. Research Quarterly for Ex- ercise and Sport, 80(3), 648–655. Lee, M., Zhu, W., Hedrick, B., & Fernhall, B. (2010). Determining MET values of physical activities for persons with paraplegia. Disability and Rehabilitation, 32(4), 336–343. Looney, M. A. (1997). “Home” improvement: The task for measurement specialist. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 1, 105–116. Mood, D. P., Jackson, A. W., & Morrow, J. R. (2007). Measurement of physical fi t- ness and physical activity: Fifty years of change. Measurement in Physical Educa- tion and Exercise Science, 11, 217–227. Morrow, J. R., Jr., Zhu, W., Franks, B. D., Meredith, M. D., & Spain, C. (2009). 1958-2008: 50 Years of youth fi tness tests in the United States. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 80(1), 1–11. National Association for Sport and Physical Education (2008). PE metrics: Assess- ing the national standards, Standard 1. Reston, VA: Author. National Association for Sport and Physical Education (2010). PE metrics: Assess- ing the national standards 1-6 in elementary school. Reston, VA: Author. Newell, K. M. (1990). Kinesiology: The label for the study of physical activity in higher education. Quest, 42, 269–278. Safrit, M. J. (1983). Measurement and evaluation in physical education: Time to pay the piper. In L. D. Hensley & W. B. East (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth Meas- urement and Evaluation Symposium (pp. 1–11). Cedar Falls, Iowa: University of Northern Iowa. Safrit, M. J. (1989). An overview of measurement. In M. J. Safrit, & T. M. Wood (eds.). Measurement concepts in physical education and exercise science (pp. 3–20). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Safrit, M. J., Atwater, A. E., Baumgartner, T. A., & West, C. (eds.). (1976). Reli- ability theory. Washington DC: American Alliance for Health, Physical Education and Recreation. Safrit, M. J., & Wood, T. M. (eds.). (1989). Measurement concepts in physical educa- tion and exercise science. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Spray, J. A. (1987). Recent developments in measurement and possible applications to the measurement of psychomotor behavior. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 58, 203–209. Thorndike, E. L. (1918). The nature, purposes, and general methods of measurement of educational products. In S. A. Courtis (ed.), The Measurement of Educational Products (17th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Pt. 2. pp. 16–24). Bloomington, IL: Public School. Weimo ZHU: BIRTH, GROWTH, AND CHALLENGES OF “KINESMETRICS” IN THE USA, 95–111 ANNALES KINESIOLOGIAE • 1 • 2010 • 2 111 Tryon, W. W. (ed.) (1991). Activity measurement in psychology and medicine. New York: Plenum. Wood, T. M. (1989). Measurement and change: The sound of one hand clapping. In M. J. Safrit (ed.), Measurement Theory and Practice in Exercise Science and Sport (pp. 92–108). Bloomington, IN: OT Publishing. Wood, T. M., & Zhu, W. (eds.). (2006). Measurement Theory and Practice in Kinesiol- ogy. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Zhu, W. (1997). Making bootstrap statistical inferences: A tutorial. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 68(1), 44–55. Zhu, W. (2003). Assessing physical activity space: Issues and challenges. Proceedings II of 2003 Daegu Universiade Conference: Facing the Challenge (pp. 601–608). 2003 Daegu Universiade Conference Organizing Committee. Zhu, W. (2007). Assessing kinesiology students’ learning in higher education. Quest, 59, 124–142. Zhu, W. (2008). Promoting physical activity using technology. Research Digest, 9(3), 1–6. Zhu, W. (2010). Sadly, the earth is still round “p < .05”. Research Quarterly for Exer- cise and Sport, 81(Suppl 1), A6 – A7. Zhu, W. (in press). Measurement practice in sport and exercise psychology: A histori- cal, comparative and “psychometric” perspective. In G. Tenenbaum, R. Eklund, & A. Kamata (eds.), Handbook of measurement in sport and exercise psychology. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Zhu, W., & Chodzko-Zajko, W. (eds.). (2006). Measurement issues in aging and physical activity: Proceedings of the 10th Measurement and Evaluation Sympo- sium. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Zhu, W., & Maxwell, S. (2006). Analyzing data from large and small data sets. In T. Wood, & W. Zhu (eds.), Measurement Theory and Practice in Kinesiology (pp. 199–216). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Zhu, W., Plowman, S. A., & Park, Y. (2010). A primar-test centered equating method for setting cut-off score. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 8, 400–409.