A great question sent to me overnight.
Q: "How do you define screen, test, assess, and evaluate?"
A: Screen, test and assess are all versions of evaluate.
Evaluate is the "parent" word that is a verb, to form an idea of the value of the subject.
A screen is a evaluation that filters a subject into two main categories - pass or fail. Another way to describe the category is - competent or not. The screen is there to look for RISK and COMPETENCE. A screen does not tell us what is wrong. It only tells us that something is wrong.
An assessment is a evaluation that reveals DISABILITY. An assessment is used to tell us what is contributing to the individual having risk, or incompetence.
A test is an evaluation to tell us about the ABILITY of the individual. When an individual passes a screen, we know they are competent, but we don't know about their capacity, so we test them for ABILITY.
I hope that helps.

For many adults, an Aston Martin is the best choice for driving long distance across the country. It's more fun. But it's much less economical, right? Just like in all athletic training programs, including marathon training schedules, effectiveness AND efficiency matter. But who wants to drive a Prius across country? Taxi drivers and retiring couples - that's who. A car enthusiast will still be driving and pouring money into their hobby. Likewise, an exercise that is fun but less effective at genuine movement or fitness goals is stuck with more than others. 

So, drive an Aston, or a Prius? Program for fun or for fitness goals? Can you do both?

Well, an Aston Marton should never surrender what it's good at. A fun exercise program should never surrender the elements that drew people in to try it. But, the exercise program you choose should always be adaptable to change. (Maybe that's why luxury car makers are making hybrid and electric cars). And change requires adaptation. Adaptation requires stimulus and a receptive person. You need to get the receptive persons attention and you do that by breaking their pattern. That's why new training every 4-6 weeks allows you to keep improving, and an interesting, fun program is more important than the best program for a person who isn't enjoying it. PS: I set enough variation and days off in my interval training program to get results and keep you in the program.

So how do you get the right mix? That's the art of coaching. But here's some tips.

The answer lies in knowing your primary goal. Is the goal more likely to be still being in training after a couple of months? That is, is the goal closer to attendance, compliance and participation? Or have you got over the buy-in phase and are pushing for results? The former will require more fun. The latter will require tighter controls on stimulus, dosage, sets and reps, volume and intensity and frequency and nutrition and sleep and recovery and repeat! If you are programming tightly and your client is jaded, talk to them. Ask them whether they're enjoying it. I know, simple stuff. Who would have thought that sort of coach to client interaction was in fashion?! If you are programming loosely for the sake of fun and your client isn't getting results, you've possibly been erring too much on keeping it fun and not enough on getting the stimulus right.

What's the common sense approach? Keep clear in your mind that you CAN get results and that you HAVE gotten results. Keep clear in your mind that no result can occur if your client doesn't enjoy the program and work because they want to. Here's the balance. Imprint onto your client the training pattern that will create the result you agreed on. If that is mobility, then don't do a bunch of mobility work and then smash them with hypertrophy work to make them sore. If it's an improvement in aerobic running speed, then bulking up will negatively affect their power to weight ratio. If the result you agreed up on was getting to the end of 7 weeks and still enjoying the training, then daily beastings of monotony aren't going to have a high success rate. 

If you're lucky enough to own an Aston, PM me for a ride, please and thank you. 

There are three big components to pay attention to when undertaking athletic training programs: 

1. The internal movement you require to get into positions, and to positions;
2. The external factors you can't control, like a long work schedule, or new baby interrupting your sleep;
3. The training and racing load. 

​In my interval training program, I organised over 20 years of program coaching, program writing, program "doing", and program studying, to take the training load component and deliver it in a smart, personable way. 

The other two components can interrupt the success of the program, but hey, thats life, right? Get yourself a great movement professional who can help you clean up the internal factors, then get amongst it. 

Interval training programs for runners are very effective for developing an improved capacity to run faster and longer. The long misunderstood value in them is not from the medium to high intensity sessions, but in the balance between those and the low intensity sessions. 

Most of the worlds best endurance athletes do no more than 25% of their running, cycling, swimming, rowing or other endurance sport, at high intensity. Those who leave out the required medium to high intensity running miss out on the opportunity to stimulate an improvement in speed of running at aerobic threshold. 

This program has a proven track record of getting great results - in the beginner or advanced athlete. There's even flexibility to work these sessions into even marathon training schedules.