Sport and Physical Activity

Whilst there is an abundance of research into sports programmes and policies which inherently discuss implementation, most fail to explicitly address this phenomenon, nor do they consider theories and concepts associated with implementation evident in social and political sciences. It is contended that to ignore such a vital process may not only limit or constrain knowledge of how and why sport policies and programmes have been implemented; but also how we come to make assumptions and propositions as to their impacts and relative successes or failures. The paper seeks to encourage the incorporation, generation and innovation of existing implementation theories, concepts and models into the sport policy analysis lexicon. It is hoped that this will not only generally broaden the sport policy analysis research agenda, but specifically, generate and develop a theoretically informed literature on the practice of sport policy and programme implementation to enhance sport policy students, academics and policy maker’s knowledge of the implementation process. To illustrate this, following a critique of top-down/bottomup and synthesised models, the paper applies Matland’s (1995) model of conflict and ambiguity to The Football Association’s Charter Standard Scheme. The paper concludes by suggesting Matland’s (1995) model is a potential way forward for analysing case study specific sport policy and programme implementation analyses

This paper examines the potential benefits of an alternative type of engagement with sport than is commonly considered in the literature on sport and international development. The research explored the extent to which students from one UK and two Ghanaian universities were empowered through working together to identify proposals for sports equipment in Ghana. A multimethod research design used video diaries and e-mail, text message, verbal and focus group interviews. The findings indicate a number of project design factors that constrained the empowerment of Ghanaian students. However, both Ghanaian and UK students were strongly motivated by, and developed new skills because of, the innovative nature of the project. Similar projects in the future can contribute further to the empowerment of young adults, if designed appropriately.

This article focuses on the response by 2056 football referees across all 51 County Football Associations in England, the Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey to an online survey conducted from 30 September 2015 to 30 November 2015 regarding their experience of officiating since the implementation of a Respect programme in 2008 by the English Football Association. In assessing the impact of the programme, whilst 54 per cent of referees felt that it has been somewhat successful, there remains a need to implement stronger sanctions and show greater support when dealing with cases of misconduct. Some 60 per cent of referees still experience abuse every couple of games and 19 per cent have experienced some form of physical abuse. With 42 per cent of our sample officiating for less than five years, there is an urgent need for the impact and effectiveness of the programme to be re-evaluated.

"English youth football coaches cognitive processes for the application of ‘Playing Form’ and ‘Training Form’ practice activities

M. Partington

Department of Sport and Physical Activity, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, Lancashire, UK, L39 4QP. Tel: +44 169 5584880; E-mail: partingm@edgehill.ac.uk

Coaches currently use behaviour and practice activities which have been learned from a combination of tradition, coaches’ intuition, and emulation of other coaches (Cushion et al., 2003, Quest. 55: 215-230). In sports such as football, practice tends to be a linear, process-product approach to learning, where ‘technique’ and ‘skills’ are to be mastered first and form the basis for games play (Harvey et al., 2010, Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy. 15 4: 361-382). Recent research however suggests that ‘playing form’ (for example, small-sided game, phase of play or conditioned game) is more relevant to performance (Ford et al., 2010, Journal of Sports Sciences. 28 5: 483-495), as this is a random and variable activity with higher contextual interference, which is better for long-term retention and long-term learning than ‘training form’ (for example, fitness, technique or drill sessions) (Lee & Simon, 2009, Contextual interference. In: Williams MA, Hodges NJ, ed. Skill Acquisition in Sport: Research, Theory and Practice, 29-44, New York: Routledge).

The purpose of this study was to identify the cognitive processes of 11 male professional English youth football coaches for the use of more ‘training form’ (1818 minutes, 53%) than ‘playing form’ (1635 minutes, 47%) (see Partington & Cushion, in press, Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sport). Each coach was interviewed using open questions and probe questions until saturation was deemed to have occurred. The value of interpretive inquiry is to develop a deeper understanding of coaching due to the complex interactions that take place in such a dynamic process (Potrac et al., 2002, Sport, Education & Society. 7 2: 183-202). Interview data were analysed using inductive content analysis (Patton, 1990, Qualitative evaluation and research methods, 24-43, Newbury Park: Sage). Interpretive interviews will identify the coaches’ cognitive processes for the choice of practice and gain understanding of practice knowledge. 
 
The use of more ‘training form’ activities is based on the view that performance is dependent on the consistent reproduction of a limited number of repeatable motor skills (e.g. dribbling, passing). Coaches believe "skills must be broken down" into smaller constituent parts first during acquisition to reduce the demands on attention, rather than practising the skills together as a whole. This belief is learnt through "observation of other traditional coaches" and "current coach education courses" instead of theoretical underpinning or evidence based research. In addition coaches do not understand how to implement ‘playing form’ activities ‘effectively’ with a "loss of control during games" and "limited amount of space" restricting the coaches’ application. Coach education should therefore give coaches a more defined theoretical underpinning and understanding of the benefits of different practice activities. It is important for a coach to understand these benefits when creating the most appropriate environment for athletes to develop.

This presentation aims to provide conceptual clarity on what is included in a ‘coaching philosophy’ and the reality of how a coach’s philosophy operates in practice. ’Coaching philosophy’ is a term frequently used in coaching research and everyday coaching discourse. However, it is a term that remains ill-defined and poorly conceptualised, resulting in considerable misuse and misunderstanding. Coaching philosophy and a coach’s philosophy have not been investigated empirically using philosophical, sociological or reflective tools. Using these tools may allow a deeper empirical understanding of coaching philosophy and transparency for practitioners. To facilitate a more realistic view of coaching practice and the coach in context, a combination of methods has been used. For example observations, semi-structured interviews and biographical interviews to help understand the rhetoric, ideological and philosophic nature of coaching praxis, and explore coaches behaviour and underpinning knowledge. The participants were nine professional English youth football coaches at one professional English football academy. The participants had a diverse range of educational backgrounds, playing backgrounds and coaching experience. The initial findings highlight the coaches’ perceptions of ‘coaching philosophy’ as non-philosophical with practice mainly being produced and reproduced by ideological discourse, instead of educational or philosophical underpinnings. As a result, this ideological discourse that influences the coaching practice is not situational to the individuals being coached, the context or the coach.

Introduction
In line with behaviouristic notions of learning, original thinking suggested that the greater level of instruction provided, the more effective the coaching (Douge & Hastie, 1993). As constructivist learning theories have received greater acceptance within the sports pedagogy literature, this concept that high amounts of instruction leads to increases in learning has been questioned. Instead, and keeping in line with the tenets of constructivism, coaches should adopt a questioning approach if the purpose is to develop learners game understanding (McNeill et al. 2008). However, no research has examined coach questioning and learners’ responses. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to qualitatively explore the questions coaches ask in practice and learners subsequent responses.

Methods
Coaches (N=5) worked in a football academy context in the North West of England. One coach was observed from each age group between under 10’s to under 14’s. Data were collected through videoing training sessions and transcribing the questioning episodes. Each coach was observed for between four to four and a half hours across three training sessions. Data were analysed using a grounded theory approach.

Discussion
Coaches questioning episodes were mostly convergent interspersed with some divergent. This resulted in limited responses from learners. It has been suggested that coaches should attempt to ask questions of a more divergent nature as it these type of questions that starts a conversation between coach and their learners (Forrest, 2013). Consequently, we urge coaches to consider their questioning approach as this will necessitate learners to reflect on their performance.