Quote:
Originally Posted by R. Nova
So you have to pass the test, and a related degree will only make it easier. Isn't that a good thing? What is it really anyway, a certification for people who got their bachelor's in some unrelated field, couldn't get a job so decided to get into this? Makes no sense. Is it just the NSCA's way of trying to make themselves seem more prestigious? I can understand requiring a bachelor's in a related field, but not in just anything. I can see how I might be up against a lot of bias here because I'm sure there are plenty of CSCSs who got their certifications under these circumstances. None of those people would want to hear what I've got to say here. Everyone will just happily bow down to the NSCA's word, whatever it may be. Anyway, it's my issue, nothing anyone has said here has made me change my opinion (let alone made much sense), and I'll just keep arguing my point.
|
You're missing the point. They decided that they would have a minimum standard, which would weed out people who didn't have a 4 year degree.
First of all, it's their test, so it's their discretion. Second, there actually appears to be logic behind their decision. They want a higher standard for the people who hold that particular certification.
It tells you that the person holding the title didn't just study for a test and pass it... They had the follow-through to get a full 4-year degree. So all you have to do is see that CSCS behind someone's name, and you know that they have a formal education in addition to meeting the requirements for training athletes.
I can understand your frustration and desire to vent. Unfortunately it does no good. When you finish your degree and go back and take it you will be that much more proud because of how hard it was to attain.
Don't put too much value on it though. I don't have a CSCS and it didn't prevent me from achieving success in this industry in the slightest.