Knowing something about leisure: help or hindrance?

Jeanne and Sprenet folks Can any of you provide me with, or inform me about, any research or documentation (or even written policies and standards) that indicates how having a degree in Recreation gives one more credentials and skills in managing a large city recreation center-as opposed to someone who does not have a degree, or have a degree in our field? Are there any research or practice articles out there that address this issue? The director of a large city park and recreation department has asked me to provide him with this research, documentation, or information. Their system is trying to require a degree in Recreation, or a closely allied field, as a requirement for anyone applying for the job of Recreation Center Director. They are in the process of trying to improve the professionalism of their staff. Some current department employees are claiming that this requirement is discriminatory, and are trying to force the director to remove this requirement for a degree in Recreation or an allied field. Can any of you point me in the right direction on finding this information? Thanks. (Leo McAvoy, posting to SPRENET, the Society for Parks and Recrea tion Educators listserve, September 7, 1999) The author of this posting poses a rather interesting question, one that certainly has implications for education, practice, and professionalization of the field. There are at least two distinct, but related issues apparent in this posting. First, what unique qualifications does a recreation graduate have that someone without the degree does not? Second, the apparent lack of "research or documentation" that addresses the first issue. The purpose of this essay is to examine both of these issues; pointing out some of the discrepancies between our beliefs and our actions, the broader implications of these discrepancies for education, practice, and professionalization, and recommendations for addressing these broader implications. Advocates of leisure services in North America (most notably in the U.S.) have attempted to move the field toward professional status. While professional activities certainly are occurring elsewhere, this essay will primarily focus on the National Recreation and Park Association's accreditation and certification programs and their effect on public recreation. A definitive characteristic of a profession is a unique knowledge base that distinguishes "professionals" from "nonprofessionals;" a knowledge base that is relayed through formal education and training. An easy, but perhaps trite, response to the question "what is unique about what you do (or why or how)?;" is "we know something about leisure!" Leisure has been identified as a part of the philosophical underpinnings of the leisure services field for quite some time and the connection between leisure and leisure services has been taught, debated, and discussed. The controversial essay by Burdge (1985) regarding the eventual split between leisure studies and parks and recreation services, for example, invoked several responses in support of the connection between the two. Despite these and other attempts, the connection between the two remains unclear. If we can accept that knowing something about leisure may be the unique contribution to the body of knowledge, skills, and abilities required of practitioners, what is it about leisure we presume to know? And how does it contribute in a unique way to what, why, or how we do what we do? Two activities that promote and connote professional status are the accreditation of academic degree programs and the certification of individual practitioners. To answer the question "what does a recreation graduate know about leisure?" an examination of the National Recreation and Park Association's (NRPA) accreditation standards for academic degree programs may provide a useful start. These standards were developed with input from both practitioners and academicians and are widely held to represent the knowledge base of the field. …