Student-Athlete Burnout: A Division I Women’s Soccer Coach’s Perspective

Abstract

The importance of resistance training (Conley & Pennington, 2022; Pennington, 2020) cardiovascular fitness (Pennington, 2015; 2016), and anaerobic power (Pennington, 2014) cannot be overstated for individuals enlisted in our country’s armed forces. The Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT) is the new branch wide fitness test designed to replace the outdated Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) (USAPHC TG 358, n.d.). The APFT was implemented in 1980 as the measure of Service Member (SM) fitness. However, this test is very limited in scope and failed to tell unit commanders how ready their SMs were for the rigors of a combat environment (US Army ACFT Field Testing Manual, n.d.). The APFT was a gender-based test that consisted of three events: a two-minute pushup evaluation to measure upper body endurance. The second event was a two-minute sit up evaluation to measure core and hip flexor endurance. While the final evaluation was a two-mile timed run, which was designed to test aerobic endurance and leg endurance. This test was simple to set up and administer but, it was not a good metric to judge SM’s actual fitness in a combat environment. If a SM had good endurance than he or she would max the test with ease. This is not a complete reflection of what is required in a combat environment. In a combat environment the SM will be loaded down with a rifle, helmet, rucksack, plate carrier, water, and ammo which often exceeds 80 pounds. The new ACFT which is still being implemented into the forces as of the writing of this paper is a much better test as it has more events to it which measure soldier strength and ability to move while under load.