The article "Professionalism: How Do You Rate?" published in the September/October Parks and Recreation magazine raised my ire to such an extent I feel a response is necessary.

The contents of this article were the result of a 1982 study using a sample of IPRA members. The author indicates that recreation practitioners are considered "highly professionalized" if they do or feel many things. This includes statements indicating professionals "feel much of their intellectual stimulation comes from colleagues in the field rather than from administrative supervisors within their organization" and "believe it is more important to acquire knowledge of leisure services offered by other agencies than to develop an understanding of the administrative operations of their own agency."

I have worked both on the State and national levels to promote professionalism in our field, and I do not believe these statements — or many others in the article — are what practitioners in Illinois believe professional attitudes should be. In fairness to the author I asked to see the entire study, as this was obviously the result of lengthy research pared down to fit the magazine's needs. I was told "the results stand alone" and, if I wanted the full study, I was to contact the University of Michigan.

If these are indeed valid results from the study, I would suggest we all take more care when answering questionnaires. Also, if IPR magazine is to publish research material, adequate space should be allotted so more complete information regarding the instrument used, methodology and definitions be included. Without such information, material such as this can be misinterpreted not only by the practitioners, but also by the many lay people who come in contact with this publication.

Sandra Whitmore
Illinois Park and Recreation
Certification Board
National Certification Board

Illinois Parks and Recreation                                 4                                       November/December 1985