| Course | EF205 Principles of Exercise Science |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 10 |
| Paper type | Reassessment and revised plan |
| Length | About 860 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Health Science |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for EF205 Unit 10
From About Thirty to About Thirty-Five: A Unit 10 Reassessment After Eight Weeks and a Revised Plan for the Last Eight Before the 5K
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
EF205: Principles of Exercise Science
Unit 10 Reassessment and Revised Plan
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The student and her results are composite; the tests and sources cited are real, and the plan is educational, not medical advice.
Retest Conditions
Same track, same Saturday morning time, same chest strap, same friend counting repetitions, no caffeine for two hours and no hard training the day before, matching the baseline in Unit 5 so that differences reflect fitness rather than conditions.
Results Compared
Resting heart rate. 76 at baseline, 70 at week eight.
Rockport walk test. Time from 16:20 to 15:05; finishing heart rate from 152 to 146; weight from 172 to 166 pounds. Estimated VO2max rose from about 30 to about 35 milliliters per kilogram per minute, using the equation of Kline et al. (1987).
Modified push-ups. 9 to 15.
Sit-and-reach. 24 to 26 centimeters.
Waist. 35 to 33.5 inches.
Effort rating at the finish of the mile walk. 15, "hard," at baseline; 13, "somewhat hard," at week eight, on the Borg (1982) scale.
I walked the same mile seventy-five seconds faster with a heart rate six beats lower, and it felt easier; that is what an aerobic adaptation looks like from the inside.
Which Changes to Trust
The walk test improvement is large enough to be meaningful. An estimated rise of about 5 milliliters per kilogram per minute exceeds my goal of 3, and it is supported by three independent signs: a quicker mile, a slower heart at the finish and an easier effort rating. Part of the estimate comes from my lower body weight, which the equation includes, but the faster time and lower heart rate show genuine fitness gains. The lower resting heart rate is consistent with improved stroke volume, as Unit 2 predicted.
The push-up increase from 9 to 15 is large and likely real, reflecting twice-weekly strength sessions. The sit-and-reach change of 2 centimeters is within the variation one might see between test days, so I will treat it as unchanged.
What Caused the Changes
Adherence. My log shows 30 of 32 planned aerobic sessions and 15 of 16 strength sessions completed. The two missed aerobic sessions were in week six, when I had a cold, and I repeated that week as the plan's rules required.
Progression. I followed the walk-jog progression and reached about 150 minutes of moderate activity by week eight, the federal guideline.
Intensity. Most sessions were rated 12 to 13, as planned.
The Unexpected Change
My back tightness after work became more frequent in weeks three and four, then less frequent than at baseline by week eight. When I looked at my log, the worse weeks were the ones in which I did strength sessions late at night when I was tired, with poor form on squats. I moved strength sessions to right after my daughter's homework, earlier in the evening, and added a hip hinge drill. The pattern improved. I had planned strength work to help my back; I had not planned for it to hurt my back when done tired.
Revised Plan for Weeks 9 to 16
Aerobic. My original plan began continuous jogging segments of 8 minutes in week nine. Because my retest results exceeded the goal and sessions felt easier, I will start at 10 minutes and reach 30 minutes of continuous jogging by week 12, two weeks earlier than planned, leaving more time for race-pace practice. The position stand supports progressing when current work is well tolerated, while still increasing gradually (Garber et al., 2011).
Strength. Keep two sessions, scheduled no later than 8:00 p.m. Move from incline to full push-ups, starting with two sets of 5.
Intensity. Add the three 2-minute faster segments in week 12 instead of week 13.
Retest. Repeat the walk test and push-ups in week 15, before race week.
What Did Not Change
Not everything improved. My flexibility was about the same, which is fine because it was never a priority. My sleep, which I had hoped exercise would improve, was better on training days but not overall, likely because my daughter's early school mornings set my wake time. I will keep tracking it, but it is not something the exercise plan alone can fix.
What the Reassessment Taught Me
Testing showed that the plan was working and gave me numbers to prove it, which raised my confidence more than any encouragement could. It also showed that the timing of training, not only its content, matters, a lesson I would not have learned without tracking my back tightness alongside my workouts.
Conclusion
After eight weeks, my estimated VO2max rose from about 30 to about 35, my resting heart rate fell by 6 beats and my push-ups rose from 9 to 15, with consistent adherence and planned progression behind the changes. The revised plan moves continuous jogging forward by two weeks, protects my back by moving strength work earlier in the evening and adds a final retest before the race.
References
Borg, G. A. V. (1982). Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 14(5), 377-381. https://doi.org/10.1249/00005768-198205000-00012
Garber, C. E., Blissmer, B., Deschenes, M. R., Franklin, B. A., Lamonte, M. J., Lee, I.-M., Nieman, D. C., & Swain, D. P. (2011). Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults: Guidance for prescribing exercise. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 43(7), 1334-1359. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e318213fefb
Kline, G. M., Porcari, J. P., Hintermeister, R., Freedson, P. S., Ward, A., McCarron, R. F., Ross, J., & Rippe, J. M. (1987). Estimation of VO2max from a one-mile track walk, gender, age, and body weight. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 19(3), 253-259. https://doi.org/10.1249/00005768-198706000-00012
EF205 Unit 10 instructions, in plain terms
Unit 10 often closes EF205 with a retest of fitness and a revised plan. Repeat the baseline tests under the same conditions, compare the results and judge which changes are large enough to trust. Instructors look for interpretation that uses several signs together and acknowledges measurement error. Adherence data should explain the results. The revised plan should follow from specific findings, with reasons for each change. Many prompts also ask what the student learned about training from the process. Reporting what did not improve, and why, is as important as the improvements. Unexpected findings, such as a pattern in soreness or fatigue, often teach the most and should be reported even when they complicate the story.
Inside the EF205 Unit 10 example
The paper opens with matched retest conditions. Results are compared test by test, from resting heart rate to perceived exertion, under a highlighted line about walking the same mile faster with a lower heart rate. A section judges which changes to trust, noting body weight's role in the estimate and treating the small flexibility change as noise. Adherence data explain the gains. The unexpected finding about late-night strength sessions and back tightness is reported with the fix. A section notes what did not change, sleep and flexibility. The revised plan moves continuous jogging forward, keeps strength sessions earlier, adds full push-ups and schedules a final retest in week 15. Lessons learned and a conclusion close it.
Reading the EF205 Unit 10 grading rubric
Reassessment papers are graded on valid comparison, careful interpretation and a plan revised from evidence. Retest conditions should match the baseline. Results should be compared accurately, with attention to which changes exceed normal variation. Graders reward using several indicators together rather than relying on one estimate. Adherence data that explain results show the student tracked the plan. Each revision should be tied to a specific finding. Reporting unexpected findings and unchanged measures shows honesty. Reflection on what the process taught adds depth. The perceived exertion scale, the exercise guidance and the walk test validation should appear in APA 7. Explaining the role of body weight in the walk test estimate shows careful reading of the equation.
EF205 Unit 10 help: mistakes that cost points
Reassessment papers often report every change as improvement, including differences within normal day-to-day variation. Another frequent problem is retesting under different conditions, which makes comparison meaningless. Some students revise the plan in general terms without linking changes to results. Adherence is often left out, so readers cannot tell whether results reflect the plan. Unexpected findings, such as new soreness, are sometimes hidden. Before writing, put baseline and retest results side by side and mark which differences are large enough to matter. Bring both sets of results and your training log, and the revision can be worked out together. Revising every part of the plan at once, rather than the parts the results point to, is another common misstep.
Get an EF205 Unit 10 example written to your instructions
Send your baseline and retest results with the instructions and rubric. A custom paper compares the results and revises the plan. The first one is free and comes back within 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More EF205 papers and BS in Health Science samples
- EF205 Unit 1: Getting Active Again Discussion Post
- EF205 Unit 2: Cardiovascular Response Paper
- EF205 Unit 3: Squat Musculoskeletal Anatomy Worksheet
- EF205 Unit 4: Exercise Preparticipation Screening
- EF205 Unit 5: Field Fitness Assessment
- EF205 Unit 6: FITT Principles Application Paper
- EF205 Unit 7: Exercise Energy Systems Paper
- EF205 Unit 8: Personalized 5K Exercise Plan
- EF205 Unit 9: HIIT Training Strategy Critique
- EF310 Unit 10: Comprehensive Program Portfolio
- HS499 Unit 10: Capstone Presentation
- HS106 Unit 10: Personal Health Career Plan
- HS460 Unit 10: Project Closeout Report
EF205 Unit 10 questions, answered
How long before retesting?
Often six to eight weeks.
What if results did not improve?
Look at adherence, intensity and recovery, and adjust.
Should the plan change after a retest?
Yes, intensity and goals are usually updated.
Where can I find a free EF205 Unit 10 sample paper?
The complete EF205 Unit 10 reassessment and revised plan is given here, comparing baseline and eight-week fitness tests and revising the final weeks before a 5K.
What unexpected change does the EF205 Unit 10 sample report?
Back tightness got worse when strength sessions were done late at night when tired, so they were moved earlier in the evening and a hip hinge drill was added.