IHPRA Newsletter
August 2002

In 1990, COL Michael D. Krause, Deputy Commander of the United States Army Center of Military History wrote, "We can draw a direct connection between a citizenry that is physically unfit, and one that is mentally as well physically ineffective at the start of a war. . . . every American war has begun with a citizenry that was unprepared for the rigors of combat, and every such war has ended with bills being proposed in congress to improve the general physical fitness of youth, in part at least to prepare them for war."  

Our great nation produces many physically fit citizens, but overall we are growing steadily more inert, malformed and clumsy. Combat veterans like Senator Ted Stevens and other national leaders have worked hard in support of the $400 million Physical Education for Progress Bill.  Senator Stevens has publicly stated his concern that our poor fitness levels will impact on our military physical readiness. Given our bleak history of failing to keep ourselves ready and the price our young will pay if we do not mold them into strong, courageous and disciplined adults, it seems reasonable to ask  why we have not been willing and/or able to tie physical education to our national security. 

In 1984, noted physical educator B. Don Franks spoke for many in his field when he wrote, "Physical conditioning has often been associated with the military preparedness of our nation. Because of the perceived public support for high level military and athletic performance, it has been tempting for professional physical educators to attempt to justify our programs on those bases . . . . the military bases for a strong physical education program [are] no longer necessary." 

While not all physical educators agree with Franks, it is safe to say that school physical education has not had the structure, content and spirit needed to link it to national preparedness since J.F.K. attempted to awaken us forty years ago. It is also accurate to note that many past physical educators were interested in linking physical education to military preparedness. In this and coming newsletters, we will pay tribute to some of them.

Canadian physical education pioneer and patriot Robert Tait McKenzie, M.D.

Thomas K. Cureton, Ph.D. was born in Florida in 1901. He earned degrees from the Georgia School of Technology, Yale University, Springfield College and Columbia University. While teaching at the University of Illinois during WWII, he pioneered innovations in physical training and assessment methods aimed at improving the fitness levels of his male students. His innovations would have widespread impact, and he remained an avid supporter of physical education-based conditioning programs. In the third edition of his physical fitness workbook, published in 1947, he left the preface as it was first written during WWII.  In it he noted:

"Almost as in World War I, the realization that over half of the male youth of the nation are unfit on medical or dental grounds for military or naval service, and that many of those judged acceptable from the health point of view are far from being prepared in vigor and in skills necessary to serve efficiently in the present war, is both a challenge and an indictment of the kinds of experiences afforded by American society for building youthful stamina and motor control. Tests of young men have revealed an appalling lack of physical development, basic motor fitness, and physical toughness."

"An increasing number of young men are rising to the challenge of physical preparedness because of patriotism and because so many wartime activities put emphasis on physical fitness for economic advancement. However, with the men who need it most the task is not an easy one for the men or the instructors. Many still need to be persuaded that they want to give themselves to the task of meeting higher standards--to pay the price, so to speak. The social habits of some eighteen years of soft living are not easily changed. A few periods of exercise will not revolutionize their ideas, physical proportions, functional ability, or social habits very easily or quickly, no mater how vigorous. The work must be gradual and thorough with much more time spent than actually called for in three periods per week. The whole project becomes one of concentrated effort, of hard work and ingenuity, of devotion which tests the character of men. In case of successful participation, the long-time value of understanding one's own physical capacity along with methods for developing and maintaining physical fitness, and coming to appreciate the standards associated with the work, will probably stand as second to nothing gained in as much time invested. It is just too bad that it takes a war to enforce what should be a regular part of educational and public health foresight."

Almost twenty years later in 1965 Cureton wrote:

"Our lack of physical fitness hurts us nationally. The fact that the rate of rejection from the Armed Forces on physical grounds is appallingly high threatens our national security and indicates a dangerous trend. Certainly it is a cause for thought that the United States Army had to halt the induction of men over thirty-eight primarily because of loss of resiliency, poor resistance to outdoor weather conditions and inability to recuperate from work."

Arthur Esslinger, Ph.D. was born in Cincinnati, Ohio on January 14, 1905. He received degrees from the University of Illinois and The State University of Iowa. Dr. Essilinger taught at Bradley Polytechnic and Stanford University, Directed the Department of Physical Education at Springfield College and was Dean of the School of Health and Physical Education at the University of Oregon.

Esslinger served in the Army from 1943-46. He was the Director of Physical Training, School of Special Services; Chief of Physical Reconditioning, Office of the Surgeon General; and Chief of Physical Training, Headquarters, Army Service Forces. In 1944, he wrote:

"We are facing a tough, determine foe who has had the advantage of having trained for years for this conflict while we have been becoming softer and softer. The biologically sterile physical education programs in our school have imposed serious handicaps upon our men who must face a well-prepared, experienced enemy. the Army and Navy have found it difficult--impossible in many cases--to make strong and tough bodies which have been neglected for years. For our failure to give adequate emphasis on physical fitness in our schools we are going to have to pay a price in "blood, sweat and tears' which might well have been averted."

Physical Educators from AEA 9 in Eastern Iowa recently met 
to develop functional fitness training and assessment strategies for the coming school year.  
The IHPRA salutes them and other physical educators leading the way 
in Iowa health and physical readiness.

HOME