Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Le téléchargement de votre SlideShare est en cours. ×

spt 3625 powerpoint (2) (1)

Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité
Publicité

Consultez-les par la suite

1 sur 17 Publicité
Publicité

Plus De Contenu Connexe

Diaporamas pour vous (20)

Publicité

Similaire à spt 3625 powerpoint (2) (1) (20)

spt 3625 powerpoint (2) (1)

  1. 1. Examine the role teachers and/or coaches play in the promotion of community youth sport and community development Liverpool FC Foundation
  2. 2. Community youth sport and community development is incredibly important within sport. Working with young people and promoting an interest in sport, as well as developing their skills is all said to contribute to a healthier lifestyle and can combat wider social issues such as crime, drug/alcohol abuse etc. Sport is said to encourage participation, inclusion and citizenship as well as bringing individuals and communities together and developing vital skills such as teamwork (Coalter 2007). Teachers and coaches play an important role in any programme; they are the ones that deliver the sessions, and have responsibility of making sure that all pupils are engaged and sessions are specific to the age group and individual needs. Having strong relationships between the coach/teacher and pupils is imperative to making sure the lessons are fun, engaging and beneficial to everybody (Jackson 2008). This presentation will introduce Sport Plus & Plus Sport. It will also focus on a specific programme which develops these two areas, as well as looking at how it promotes community youth sport and community development.
  3. 3. 2010 – A Sporting Britain for All: The aim of this programme was to influence people into playing sport, simply because they love playing sport. It also wanted to increase the opportunities people had to play sport, and to promote young peoples aspirations (Collins 2012). 1997 – New Labour had an emphasis on social inclusion, community renewal & increased personal responsibility. They believed sport had a prominent role in achieving these aims (Bloyce & Smith 2010). 2000 – Sporting Future for All (DCMS 2000): aimed to increase opportunities for everybody, regardless of background & age, included a five part plan e.g. building new facilities, creating specialist sports colleges etc. 2002 – Game Plan: the main ain was to promote social inclusion, having the belief that sport could provide many benefits e.g. reducing crime (Bloyce & Smith 2010). 2003 – PESSCL: social inclusion was ever present. Labour didn’t want communities to become excluded through problems i.e. drug and crime (Bloyce & Smith 2010). Emphasis on personal responsibility and culpability was also present (Coalter 2007). 2004 – Sport England (National Framework for Sport). Aimed to increase participation and wanted sport & physical activity to improve health and other social issues. 2005 – Winning bid for Olympics: Horne & Whannel (2012) & Lenskyi (2008) – emphasis on placed on how the Olympics would transform London’s poorest areas, and bring about positive changes within sport by inspiring people to participate more and giving more opportunities. 2008 – PESSYP: created the five hour offer, increasing opportunities and gave 3 hour to 16-19 year olds.
  4. 4. Creating a Sporting Habit for Life • DCMS (2012): a main aim was to inspire a generation to take up sport and to continue it throughout life, using the Olympics as inspiration. Participation levels have fallen in major sports, as well as once pupils leave school; another aim was to break down barriers which stop people from participating in sport. Over £1b of lottery & exchequer funding is being given. They also want to increase the amount of 14-25 year olds who regularly participate in sport as well as establishing networks between schools and clubs within communities. There main aims within this are: Building a lasting legacy of competitive sport within schools i.e. School Games has over £150m funding till 2015. Improving links between schools and community sport clubs e.g. establishing over 6,000 partnerships between schools and local sports clubs till 2017.Working with sports governing bodies to promote lifelong participation. Investing in facilities i.e. £160m will be spent on new and upgraded facilities. Schools can open their facilities to the public. They will work with local authorities, voluntary groups to broadcast sport to young people i.e. up to £50m will be available for sports clubs and voluntary clubs to enhance people’s sporting
  5. 5. Plus Sport – this is where young people are developed through sport. By playing sport, social & educational development can be obtained, as well as developing health and social issues such as crime, drug/alcohol abuse, mental illness etc. Plus Sport is focuses on social development through sport, using it as a way of developing people in other areas as well i.e. education, improving health etc (Darnell 2012). Bloyce & Smith (2010) further comment that many community programmes are focusing more on developing people and the community through sport. The development of short-term goals such as behaviour, attendance etc. is said to be the prime focus, rather then the long-term development of their football ability. Sport Plus – this is the development of young people in sport i.e. their sporting skill is developed whilst playing sport. Their focus is developing their sports skill i.e. participation, skill and technique. Darnell (2012) & Hoye & Nicholson (2008) emphasize that sport plus focuses on the development within the sport as it focuses on improving their skills. Coaches would typically be responsible and henceforth have the most responsibility to ensure sessions are geared towards individual needs, ensuring their skills are developed.
  6. 6. The Liverpool Football Club (LFC) Foundation This is the official charity of Liverpool Football Club. What do they do? - They deliver a wide range of initiatives to inspire all people regardless of ability and background to make positive changes for themselves and their community. Why do they do it? - The club believes in looking out for each other and particularly those in need. They have a desire to bring communities together, inspiring and raising ambitions as this ensures everybody has good health, happiness and have the best opportunities in life. By transmitting their passion for football locally, nationally and globally, they get people engaged and inspire those to follow with their passion for football into making positive changes. How do they do it? - They have four main focus areas which are: 1/. Sporting Participation – ensuring people are active by building and uniting communities through football and other sports, focusing on improving the amount of young people who participate in sport as well as addressing social inclusion. 2/. Improving Life Chances – they enable people to reach their full potential through initiatives focusing on health, education and employment. 3/. Inspiring Social Action – where they inspire international fans to make a positive contribution to the Foundation and raising awareness of issues within their communities. 4/. Supporting Other Charities – where trusted partners do more of their work by making the most of the power of LFC. Partners such as Carlsberg and Vauxhall invest into the foundation. Upon visiting international countries, sponsors will normally invest into the charity following their visit.
  7. 7. Football & Sports Development programmes involved • Premier League 4 Sport: this programme helps young people get involved in local sport within their community. Premier League Clubs become linked to community sports facilities, in which are then linked to local secondary schools to create satellite sports centres. Each club has a specific co-ordinator, working locally with sports clubs and schools to maximise opportunities. Within LFC, the co-ordinator increases participation in athletics, badminton, boxing, netball, table tennis & volleyball. These satellite clubs aim to promote Olympic sports and to give as many opportunities of sport as possible for young people (Green et al 2015 ). Since it began in 2009, it has used the power of football to engage over 39,000 young people into new sports such as Badminton & Judo. It aims to engage, sustain & retain young people into participating in sport, and within the foundation, it has been very successful. • Premier League Girls: Launched in 2013, it aims to encourage more women and girls into playing football. It drives involvement in girls football and coaching; since it launched, over 20,00 girls have participated in the programme in August 2014. • Kickz: the aim of this programme is to create football opportunities for young people living in highly deprived areas and are said to be vulnerable to crime, aiming to promote social inclusion and engaging communities (Bloyce & Smith 2010). Its main aim was to reach out to young people who have been difficult to engage and encourage them to partake in more healthy activities, as well as building stronger, safer and more respectful communities. There has been a 60% reduction in crime & anti-social behaviour in Kicks areas, emphasizing it’s success. The programme was created in 2006; with it’s main partners being the police, it wanted to encourage inclusion and participation within sport and creating positive relationships between disadvantaged communities and the police. Since it began within Liverpool, Merseyside Police have recorded a 79% reduction in crime in the areas Kickz is delivered.
  8. 8. Football & Sports Development – roles, responsibilities & policy • Premier League 4 Sport: coaches will teach football, as well as sports such as Badminton and Judo. They use sport to aid skills as well as meeting societal objectives. The programme won Coaching Intervention of the Year Award in 2010 (Premier League 2015) which emphasizes its success. They work with Everton FC & Youth Sport Trust, as well as having satellite clubs, making it distinct from School PE (DCMS 2012). This also relates to Sport Plus as it is working on their football skills and aiming to improve their skills, as well as using sport to achieve other goals e.g. communication, education etc. (Coalter 2013). This program helps to remove barriers to participating in sport, notably within football, and the use of coaches whom are trained further helps to encourage people into playing sport (Borland & Burton 2015), emphasizing the importance of coaches involvement. • Premier League Girls: coaches lead the sessions in which Sport Plus is the main aim, as they are using football to engage girls, whom are less likely to partake in sport as their levels of participation and interest declines as they get older (Gibbons 2011). Eccles & Gootman (2002) also emphasizes that coaches and teachers have a great impact on improving girls confidence and self-esteem, due to the fact they are in authoritive position and can be seen as people they can trust. • Kicks: the provision of two football sessions shows they are aiming to develop their football skills, which is led by the coaches. (Sport Plus). The additional session provided i.e. healthy eating, volunteering etc, shows they are using their passion for sport to teach other aspects of life. Coalter (2007:40) emphasizes how sport is “…a measure of attracting young people…, showing how they encourage participants in all aspects of life. It also creates routes into education, further employment. Bloyce & Smith (2010) exclaim the importance of creating positive, non-judgemental and respectful environments, ensuring participants are comfortable and engaged within the session. The programme has indeed been successful; robbery has reduced by 32.6% and burglary has reduced by 18.6%, emphasizing the success of the programme.
  9. 9. • Naparstek (2000:20) – participants will see “…coaches/teachers as role models and will have an effect on pupils confidence, self-esteem and social skills” also emphasizing how the programmes achieve Plus Sport goals. Teachers must ensure individual needs are met and lessons meet desired outcomes e.g. social skills. • Blackmore et al (2004) – girls participate less than boys in school and the community and teachers sometimes struggle with differentiating between the two genders and teaching different activities. Premier League 4 Girls programme is performing ahead of expectations, with more females now leading the sessions, emphasizing the impact. PlusSport would indirectly be involved as girls would develop confidence and social skills. • Lumpkin (2010) – teachers/coaches have positions of leadership and responsibility, and can easily influence the thoughts, actions & feelings of young people, in which they also need to be “…motivating, enthuastic and encouraging” (Lumpkin 2010:66) • Duke (1995) – teachers/coaches also need the right knowledge, discipline, and need to be approachable and respectful, which will ensure that sessions are engaging and effective for the participants. The fact that they are heavily involved within the community, show that they are helping towards creating a lasting Olympic legacy and creating a legacy of sports participation within communities, showing how it’s meeting policy aims. Having football sessions would also relate to Sport Plus. • In terms of participation for children/young people, MacPhail & O’Sullivan (2010) proclaims that they will struggle to engage in sessions which they feel are inactive and not engaging, leading to feelings of powerlessness. Therefore, the importance of the coaches to ensure everyone is engaged and enjoying themselves within the lesson is imperative. • Stafford (2005) – in order for participants to obtain the most from the sessions, coaches should deliver high quality sessions, as this is the only way they will be able to maximise their involvement and potential within the sport, emphasizing the importance of high quality coaches. Football & Sports Development – roles, responsibilities & policy
  10. 10. Other programmes within LFC Foundation
  11. 11. Liverpool FC (2015) Mike March – Liverpool FC (2015) Liverpool FC (2015)
  12. 12. Other relevant roles for teachers & coaches 1/. Every adult involved in the programme has a duty of care for all participants whilst they are in their environment, with Baginsky (2008) emphasizing the importance of safeguarding requirements. Leahy et al (2002) comments that over 41% of females and 29% of males have experienced abuse within the sports environment. 2/. Employees within LFC Foundation must adhere to the standards of Every Child Matters (2003); they are responsible for keeping participants safe and ensuring they are enjoying themselves when in the programme. All programmes use the Every Child Matters (2003) framework. 3/. The Foundations minimum operating standards ensures that all teachers and coaches they employ meet the requirement to work for the foundation. They provide ongoing training (AfPE), continuous professional development and safeguarding workshops. The teachers and coaches must ensure they keep up to date with their training and don’t provide any false information. 4/. Teachers and practitioners involved all have a constant duty of care in making sure the activities and surroundings are safe (Whitlam 2013), which is why they must be aware of health and safety i.e. risk assessments. 5/. Involvement of teachers and coaches is critical; they will have the experience and knowledge to establish positive relationships between themselves and their participants, making it more likely they will achieve the desired outcomes (Bloyce & Smith 2010). Arthur & Phillips (2000) emphasizes the importance of ensuring they met the aims of each programme and having all pupils engaged. 6/. Coalter (2007) – they also need to be aware of cultural & ethnic differences to ensure all needs are met and is inclusive.
  13. 13. Impact of the LFC Foundation & Programmes• Hoye & Nicholson (2006): sport contributes to school improvement, community development, improving personal behaviour and promoting positive change. Sport England (2009) exclaims how providing high quality sport improves social skills i.e. teamwork and educational standards. • DCMS (2012): satellite clubs are within easy reach for young people, giving more opportunities to participate in sport across the community. Satellite clubs enable young people to have access to sports clubs through Liverpool FC. • Coalter (2007) & Crabbe (2008) emphasize that although sport is effective on its own, it has to be assisted and supported by other activities which all contribute to the long-term development of young people (Plus Sport). • Childhood obesity has doubled in the last thirty years and has quadrupled with adolescents (CDC 2014); these educational and sport programmes all help towards leading a healthy active lifestyle, all of which will contribute to helping these levels decrease, also linking into the Healthy Weight & Active Lives initiative. • Waddington & Smith (2009) emphasize the positive link between sport and health promotion; by providing active football sessions, they are helping young people in achieving guidelines for physical activity. In turn, this relates to Sport Plus & Plus Sport as they are improving football skills, as well as achieving health goals. • Within Kicks, the incorporation of education means pupils may be introduced to the National Curriculum, giving opportunities for further knowledge and development of social skills (Bloyce & Smith 2010). • Whitlam (2013) – programmes are continually being invested into, emphasizing its effectiveness which will continue in the long-term.
  14. 14. Impact of the LFC Foundation & Programmes • Bloyce & Smith (2010): the government may simply use sport as a cost-effective way of addressing social problems, just so they can be seen as working within communities. It raises the question as to whether they are suitable and effective in the long-term. • Bloyce & Smith (2010) & Sport England (2005): current sporting policies can be seen as somewhat exclusive, due to its focus on competitive sport. Public health doesn’t seem to be a priority, suggesting they are focusing too much on competition. • Hoye & Nicholson (2008): throughout Labour, most programmes are seen as a way of achieving wider social goals i.e. education. It is implied that non- sporting outcomes were more important than the development of sporting skills. • Social inclusion was a dominant theme, notably in A Sporting Future for All & Game Plan, through Labour government (Bloyce & Smith 2010). Their main priority was Plus Sport, inferring they didn’t focus on ensuring participation within sport for enjoyment and skill development. The focus on participation and Olympic legacy in Creating a Sporting Habit for Life implies Labour didn’t aid or encourage this area (Sport Plus). • Coalter (2007) mentions that sport and physical activity programs are less likely to have a direct impact on anti-social behaviour, suggesting the focus on social inclusion has driven the real motto and aims away within sport. Coalter (2007) emphasizes this is why Sport Plus has become ever prominent in the last few years. • Darnell(2012) implies that although programmes may seem effective in statistics, coaches performance can vary and may never reflect day to day occurrences within sessions i.e. data may reflect sessions which are created when they are being assessed.
  15. 15. As pupils are less likely to view their peers as authority figures, due to the fact their attitudes are highly influenced by their peers (Coalter 2008), the importance of teachers and coaches as authority figures is crucial. The teachers and coaches are what make the programmes achievable and engaging, therefore emphasizing their importance. The Foundations emphasis on social inclusion shows they are promoting youth and community development, as well as achieving their goals within Creating a Sporting Habit for Life (Bloyce & Smith 2010). Whilst Sport Plus is a dominant feature within the Football & Sports Development branch, Plus Sport is still involved, emphasizing the positive impact Liverpool FC Foundation is having within communities, schools and people’s lives. ConclusionConclusion
  16. 16. Bibliography • ARTHUR, J., & PHILLIPS, R. 2000. Issues in History Teaching. London: Routledge. • BAGINSKY, M., 2008. Safeguarding Children and Schools. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. • BLACKMORE, J., KENWAY, J., RENNIE, L. & WILLIS, S., 1998. Answering back: Girls, Boys and Feminism in Schools. London: Routledge. • BLOYCE, D. & SMITH, A., 2010. Sport policy and development: an introduction. Abingdon: Routledge. • BORLAND, J.F. & BURTON, L.J. 2015. Sport Leadership in the 21st Century. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Learning. • BRAMLEY, G., DAVIES, I., HAMPDEN-THOMPSON, G., JEFFES, JENNIFER., LORD, P., SUNDAREM, V & TSOUROUFLI, M., 2015. Teachers views on students experiences of community involvement and citizenship education. Education, Citizenship & Social Justice . 10 (1) pp.67-78. • CARLESS, D. & DOUGLAS, K., 2010. Sport and Physical Activity for Mental Health. Sussex: Blackwell Publishing. • CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION., 2014. Childhood Obesity Facts [online]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/obesity/facts.htm [Accessed date: 22nd April 2015]. • CHEESEBOROUGH, J., 2015. Getting involved in international development activities: UK initiatives and hidden benefits. Health Information and Libraries Journal. 32 (4) pp. 1-4. • COALTER, F., 2011. Sport developments contribution to social policy objectives. The difficult relationship between politics and evidence. London: Routledge. • COALTER, F., 2007. A Wider Social Role for Sport. Who’s Keeping the Score?. London: Routledge. • COALTER, F., 2013. Sport for development: What game are we playing?. Abingdon: Routledge. • COLLINS, R., 2012. A Sporting Britain for All. Labour: London. • CRITES, C.V., 2008. Parent and community involvement: A case study. USA: ProQuest. • DARNELL, S., 2012. Sport for Development and Peace: A critical Sociology. London: Bloomsbury. • DEPARTMENT FOR CULTURE, MEDIA & SPORT., 2012. Creating a sporting habit for life. London: Department for Culture, Media & Sport. • DEPARTMENT FOR CULTURE, MEDIA & SPORT., 2000. Sporting future for all. London: Department for Culture, Media & Sport.
  17. 17. • EVERY CHILD MATTERS, 2003. Every Child Matters. London: The Stationary Office. • FLINTOFF, A., 2003. The School Sport Co-ordinator Programme: changing the role of the physical education teacher?. Sport, Education and Society. 8 (2) pp. 231-250. • GIBBONS, S.L., HUMBERT, M.L. & TEMPLE, V.A., 2011. Enhancing Girls Participation in Physical Education: A Framework for Action. Physical and Health Education Journal. 77 (3) pp. 16-23. • GREEN, J., GROSS, R., TONES, K., & WOODALL, J, 2015. Health Promotion: Planning & Strategies. London: SAGE. • HORNE, J. & WHANNEL, G., 2012. Understanding the Olympics. Abingdon: Routledg.e • HOULIHAN, B. & LINDSAY, I., 2012. Sport Policy in Britain. London: Routledge. • HOYE, R, & NICHOLSON, M., 2008. Sport and Social Capital. London: Routledge. • JACKSON, M.A. 2008. Teachers perception of the role of the principal regarding teacher retention in title 1 elementary schools in selected countries in West Georgia. London: Capella University. • LAUNDER, A.G. & PILITZ, W., 2013. Play Practice: Engaging and Developing Skilled Players from Beginner to Elite. Leeds: Human Kinetics. • LUMPKIN, A., 2010. Teachers and Coaches as Leaders Demonstrating Character and Competence. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance. 81 (8) pp. 49-52. Available from: http://0-search.proquest.com.library.edgehill.ac.uk/docview/758940946?pq-origsite=summon [Accessed: 8th March 2015]. • MACPHAIL, A. & O’SULLIVAN, M., 2010. Young People’s Voices in Physical Education and Youth Sport. Abingdon: Routledge. • NAPARSTEK, N., 2002. Successful Educators: A Practical Guide for Understanding Children’s Learning Problems and Mental Health Issues. British Library Cataloguing: USA. • PAGAN, J.L., 2008. Self and informant reported personality disorder traits in treatment seeking military veterans. USA: ProQuest. • PREMIER LEAGUE., 2015. Premier League 4 Sport [online]. Available from: http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/communities/2011-12/premier- league-4-sport.html • WHITLAM, P (2013) . Can Schools Fully Delegate Their Duty of Care for Pupils To Third Party Agencies? London: Routledge.

×