Home CertificationGet CertifiedExam Information Exam Specifications and Blueprints

Exam Specifications

The examination for each level of certification is composed of multiple choice questions drawn from the KSAs found in the 7th Edition of ACSM's Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription. Testing will begin on the 8th Edition of ACSM's Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription July 1, 2009.  Learn about the transition of our new books and our certification examinations: www.acsm.org/ExamTransitionInfo.  Each level of certification includes "trial" questions that are being tested for use in future examinations. These trial questions are randomly distributed throughout the exam and will not be counted in the final results.

Due to the different KSAs required for each credential, each credential has a different number of questions and allotted exam time.

Exam Blueprints

The approximate distribution of exam questions across each KSA competency area for each ACSM certification exam is as follows:

* RCEP practice areas are tested as follows:
   General Population.................................................... 40%
   Cardiovascular......................................................... 15%
   Pulmonary............................................................... 10%
   Metabolic................................................................. 14%
   Orthopedic/Musculoskeletal........................................ 7%
   Neuromuscular.......................................................... 5%
   Immunologic/Hematologic/Neoplastic.......................... 9%

Note: Percentages are approximate values

Exam Development and Implementation 

The Job Task Task Analysis

ACSM CCRB certification examinations are comprised of a variety of conventional and innovative item types that are created with reference to a specified body of knowledge (KSA's).  When the techniques or methods used in practice change, this body of knowledge changes too.  Periodic evaluation of this body of knowledge occurs via a Job Task Analysis (JTA), or a Role Delineation Study.  Typically, a large, representative sample of the professional population and/or panel of subject matter experts are asked to evaluate and potentially revise KSA's, as well as recommend new KSA's based on emerging trends in daily practice.  Part of this process involves determining the criticality of each KSA by ranking its importance and frequency of application or recall in a typical daily, weekly or monthly work.  By conducting a JTA according to widely-accepted best practices, the resulting examination stays current, relevant, and valid.  It is important to recognize that the outcome of this emphasis on validity is to make appropriate decisions about the results of the candidates who take the exams.

Exam Item Writing

The ACSM CCRB certification exams are developed according to specifications and administered according to specific procedures.  As the exams are developed, test questions are selected for exams according to a level of difficulty.  For example, we want an exam that is made up of test questions that will provide a fair measure of candidates' abilities before earning the credential.  We make sure that all of the topics in the body of knowledge are represented by test questions ranging from easy to difficult.  Item writers receive comprehensive item writing training, and we review and edit all test questions to be sure the questions are consistent with widely accepted best practices regarding item writing guidelines.  We intend that each test question will help to discriminate between those who should pass the test from those who should not.  Items are either operational (scored) or experimental (non-scored).  For all exams, a majority of test items are scored and other are non-scored.  Both overall exam performance and individual item performance is evaluated periodically, to ensure that each of the test questions is performing for us in the way we want.  If an operational (scored) test question is not performing to our specifications, then we will schedule to replace that test question in future versions of the exam.  Experimental items that meet or exceed our specifications are converted to scored items, as appropriate, in future versions of the exams.

Performance Assessment

The ACSM CCRB has Credentialing Groups (CG), made up of subject matter experts, stakeholders, practitioners and leadership, to provide specific oversight for each credential.  The CG's meet at least twice per year, and are in-touch via email and conference calls periodically throughout the year.  At the regularly scheduled meetings, the CG's review all the item data available from recent exam administrations.  The CG's also review a report provided by the consulting psychometrician as to the overall performance on the exams, the passing rates, and item statistics on item performance for all candidates and first time test takers.  The CG's review experimental/pre-tested items that are outside of statistical criteria range of .5-.9 difficulty and/or are negatively discriminating items.

Other reasons for item review is to correct flaws or to consider revisions based on item performance that fall above or below the previously mentioned range.  All of these items are reviewed and the CG's may re-write the item to increase or decrease difficulty based on item writing training, correct contextual flaws, or reject the item entirely.  Items are also reviewed/created based on needs to increase the item inventory by content area (and/or by specific KSA) of the exam.  The goal is to develop and enhance the item pool by administering items with reliable statistical data within a set of range of about .5-.9 difficulty and positive discrimination, since the items within this range around the passing score will be most discriminating and efficient for our purposes of certification testing.  In addition, the item writers and reviewers are looking to craft items at a higher taxonomic order than just recall and are trained in how to create such items.  Again, the intent is to build a robust item pool with more discriminating items and the higher order items (beyond recall) are more likely to assist to fulfill this goal.

This process of continuous evaluation and revision is intended to improve our reliability and minimize the error in the exam, and to ensure that the various exam forms have equivalent difficulty.  We us statistical procedures (such as correlations, bi-serials) to determine degrees of reliability and how much error may be associated with each score (standard error of the mean) as well as across the entire exam (standard error measurement).  By the use of systematic procedures for item development, test development, test administration, and scoring, we increase our level of confidence in the process and can assure the profession at large that our exams are defensible, reliable, and valid.