I can't speak about the actual, day-to-day advantages/disadvantages of choosing either option: on one hand, passing the National Board of Fitness Examiners (NBFE,
www.nbfe.org) examination; on the other, obtaining certification from a NCCA-accredited institution. Perhaps someone with professional experience could give us his/her opinion.
In the meantime, in the case you haven't done so, consider reading these resources:
* The position of ACE, an NCCA-accredited institution (other accredited organisms include NSCA-CC, NASM, and others):
http://www.acefitness.org/media/faq_accreditation.aspx
Point (9) in this document alludes to the current discussion:
"9) Do we need a national board exam for fitness professionals?
The current proposal for a national board exam is based on the false assumption that there are no credible national standards for fitness certification today and that a national board exam is the precursor to licensure for fitness professionals. In fact, NCCA accreditation is the recognized standard for professional credentialing and licensing exam organization in the allied healthcare and other skilled professional fields. Any new credentialing organization would still need to earn NCCA accreditation which would take a minimum of two years following the introduction of their testing instrument (exam)."
* On the other hand, the position of the institutions interested in the NBFE (ISSA is one of them):
http://www.nbfe.org/articles/historical_time.cfm
Their justification:
"The fitness industry has been faced with a serious problem when it comes to the issuance of certifications and the accreditation of organizations that issue certifications. One of the most critical obstacles has been that each certification organization uses its own job task analysis for establishing trainer competencies. As a result, a different set of skills is tested by each organization, and thus a certification issued by one organization means something different than a certification issued by another organization, no matter who accredits them.
Similarly, because various accreditation agencies rely on the job task analysis utilized by a particular certification organization, an accreditation means something different for each organization as well. The problem is further compounded when universities and colleges develop curricula for personal training based on the department or chairpersons opinions or yet again, different job task analyses. Simply put, there are no national standards for becoming a certified personal fitness trainer."
* An overview of the situation, prior to the NBFE initiative, by IDEA:
http://www.ideafit.com/pdf/career_dev_cert_balance.pdf
ZachL: I've been asking myself the same question, and would like to hear the opinions of this forum's professionals about this issue. Recently, I have found out that some specialization courses (for instance, those provided by ACE and NASM) require that the student possess a certification emitted by an NCCA-accredited organization; that means that if you choose (exclusively) the NBFE path instead of the NCCA one, those courses would be out of your reach. I don't know whether NBFE-affiliated institutions have made (or will start to make) similar distinctions.
Linear Mode
