really necessary to join NCSA?

[Ogedei]

Originally Posted by kuri

The last coupla days I've been reviewing the endocrinology chapter in Essentials & it just me or is this stuff really hard?!

Can anyone recommend other resources to get a handle on this stuff?

Jonathon or any other CSCS holder, can I expect questions concerning hormones that are more difficult than the sample questions in the book?

The first few biology chapters in that book are crazy, at least I thought so. I really need to re-read them like a million times. The terms look framiliar but I can't answer the questions on the pre-test.

Not that I am even eligible for the CSCS



Og,

[bipennate]

Originally Posted by RedLefty

Fass said that almost all the questions on the real exam are harder than the practice tests or online tests.

Yep, that was my experience with it...drilling the questions helps, no doubt about that. If you can answer those, you will have a very good chance with the actual test, but you still need to be prepared to "think outside the box" and look at situations or levels of detail not provided in any practice question. The open-ended questions are very good for that.

When I sat for the exam, I read over each question very carefully, even underlining the important words in the question and crossing out the information that they throw in to try and trick you. There will be questions that aren't covered in the book, and it will frustrate you! You have to keep your wits about you and trust your knowledge.

[Keith Scott]

In my experience, I did VERY well on the first part of the exam which was mostly science and nutrition.......I did well, but not as well on the second part which was the practical part. I thought that was tough because of the format. They show a quick video and you need to answer questions related to the video. You dont get a second chance to see the video. That was tougher for me because I tend to over analyze things and wanted more time to see everything (which I think is important for a good coach).

[Lou Schuler]

I'm working off deep memory, since I took it five years ago, but what I remember most is how I couldn't even understand the premise of a few of the questions -- I read the questions over and over again and still couldn't grasp what was being asked.

That's why it pays to study the shit out of the book. Some questions on the test won't make any sense at all, so you really need to be able to answer the ones that are taken directly from the book.

As for the endo stuff, I guess I was lucky, in that I was already writing about it for MH at the time, and had heard Dr. Kraemer lecture a few times at conferences and sort of got comfortable with the scientific terminology.

My biggest struggle came back in '97, when I started learning all this stuff from scratch to take the ACE test. The kinesiology required a major brain-rewiring. It's harder than it looks, after a lifetime of doing bench presses, to start thinking about them as horizontal adduction of the shoulder joint combined with extension of the elbow joint using a pronated grip that's approximately 1.5 times biacromial width, conducted in the frontal plane.

As a journalist, I was used to relying on researchers and practitioners who gave me the layman's summary. Actually going to the sources of information they use is, as I've said in other threads, like learning a second language.

[kuri]

Good advice guys, thanks.

Lou, your response just plain frightened me!

Like Red, I don't have a background in sciences so this really is like trying to learn another language.

I'm 4 months out from the exam and am on my second reading through Essentials, but am wondering if there are other resources worth checking out or if that might lead to confusion on the test?

Seeing as there are questions drawn from material outside the book is it worth devoting time to other sources?

[Keith Scott]

4 months is plenty, but the test is pretty much right from that book. Know the book, you will pass.......UNDERSTAND the material in it and you will pass easy!!

[malkore]

Originally Posted by bipennate

Famous last words

Give it a quick try (for free) here:
http://nsca.hkeducationcenter.com/Co...fo/pretest.cfm
Good luck!

I did 5 out of 5 on module's 4 and 8, but mostly 2 or 3 outta 5 on the others, and a couple 1 outta 5's.

So, as I said, I have a decent foundation, but I know I need to improve in lots of areas.

[dos]

Originally Posted by kuri

Good advice guys, thanks.

Lou, your response just plain frightened me!

Like Red, I don't have a background in sciences so this really is like trying to learn another language.

I'm 4 months out from the exam and am on my second reading through Essentials, but am wondering if there are other resources worth checking out or if that might lead to confusion on the test?

Seeing as there are questions drawn from material outside the book is it worth devoting time to other sources?

If you know 'essentials' you will be fine. Funny thing is that in the old days (I took my CSCS exam WAY back in 1990...) there was about a 70% failure rate. These days, it's closer to 50%. Seems that they made things a bit easier but at the same time, most of the first time failures used to be in the exercise science section but nowadys there is almost an equal amount of failures in the practical section. What does that mean? I would guess that more bookworms are taking the exam than before.

[Lisa~]

I want to second what bip said about needing to be able to apply what you've learned. The questions do not ask you to spit back out what you read in the book. They require you to think and comprehend what you've learned and make an intelligent decision about what you'd do.

I had already been training clients when I took the CSCS, so the practical part was what I thought was the easiest. I could see the video and know exactly what to answer. The anatomy didn't get me as much as the endocrinology. Should you study materials outside the Essentials book? I think the practice tests (the long ones you buy, not the online one) will help you find your weak points. Studying those topics with materials beyond the book is, imo, a good idea.

[rem1956]

Speaking strictly for myself, I enjoy reading the "scientific stuff". I have a strong interest in fitness and I'm currently studying for my NSCA-CPT. I have a MS in chemistry, so I enjoy that "scientific stuff".

[Steve-O-68]

The CPT cert is looking better and better! Although, if I had a 4 year degree, I'd be all over CSCS...

[Ogedei]

I think the theories on how things work are pretty amazing and I found it fairly interesting reading. It just dosen't stick with me

I'm pretty far from Chem as well. It was the one science that I never really took to. But then as a kid I never took to excercise either.

I can see taking the NSCA-CPT exam in my future. But I can see not taking it as well. It would strictly be a goal set up for me to actually learn at a deeper level. Just like my first Tri was a goal to have to train for something.

That and it would be kinda cool to achieve for me...for the same reason

Og.

[Lost Dog]

If I could go back in time and get into a fitness related field, I would. A CPT cert might be in my future (no degree...), but I'd really have to find a way to get going with training, somehow, without stopping my current job.

[Lou Schuler]

I would guess that more bookworms are taking the exam than before.

At this year's NSCA conference, a friend of mine who teaches exercise physiology told me that he's seeing more and more students who don't work out and don't have much interest in it ... but they still want to become personal trainers!

I have no idea if this is a trend or just something peculiar to some of his recent students.

I can't imagine anything stranger than a personal trainer who doesn't work out. I remember one or two classmates in journalism school who didn't read newspapers and didn't seem to have much interest in the field they were planning to enter. That didn't make much sense to me, either.

[bipennate]

Originally Posted by Lou Schuler

At this year's NSCA conference, a friend of mine who teaches exercise physiology told me that he's seeing more and more students who don't work out and don't have much interest in it ... but they still want to become personal trainers!

I have no idea if this is a trend or just something peculiar to some of his recent students.

I can't imagine anything stranger than a personal trainer who doesn't work out. I remember one or two classmates in journalism school who didn't read newspapers and didn't seem to have much interest in the field they were planning to enter. That didn't make much sense to me, either.

That's a really interesting observation: I've seen the same thing here at Rutgers, actually. People either working in the gym, or exercise science students that don't seem to be terribly interested in actually working out...I always found that to be terribly puzzling.

Then again, hasn't that always been the slam on the science of exercise science? A bunch of brains sitting in a lab without any "real-world" experience?

[Lost Dog]

The trainers at my gym don't know anything AND they're fat.

[kuri]

Originally Posted by Lost_Dog

The trainers at my gym don't know anything AND they're fat.

24hr Fitness doesn't count:p I've seen a few trainers that obviously don't train but a CSCS-holding strength coach that doesn't know what doing a power clean feels like is...wow.

Then again there are a whole lot of people in the music industry that don't know shit about making music.

The practical sections have been easier and I really enjoy getting into problem solving/program design situations, but getting a real grasp on the interrelated workings of the hormonal & other systems, and the terminology has been the biggest challenge by far.

Keep plugging away at the bk is the message here I guess.