Evaluation of a Brief Intervention to Assist Health Visitors and Community Practitioners to Engage with Fathers as Part of the Healthy Child Initiative

Aims: To improve engagement of Health Visitors and Community Practitioners delivering the Healthy Child Programme with fathers. To evaluate a one-day, father-focused workshop with a supporting handbook for Practitioners. To identify institutional and organisational barriers to engagement with fathers. Background: The UK government policy encourages health professionals to engage with fathers. This derives from robust evidence that fathers’ early involvement with their children impacts positively on emotional, behavioural and educational development. Yet, there is little evidence that the importance of engaging fathers is reflected in Health Visitor training or that primary-care services are wholly embracing father-inclusive practice. The Fatherhood Institute (FI), a UK charity, has developed a workshop for Practitioners delivering the Healthy Child Programme. Method: A ‘before and after’ evaluation study, comprising a survey followed by telephone interviews, evaluated the impact of the FI workshop on Health Visitors’ and Community Practitioners’ knowledge, attitudes and behaviour in practice. A total of 134 Health Visitors and Community Practitioners from eight NHS Trusts in England attended the workshop from November 2011 to January 2014 at 12 sites. A specially constructed survey, incorporating a validated questionnaire, was administered before the workshop, immediately afterwards and three months later. Telephone interviews further explored participants’ responses. Findings: Analysis of the questionnaire data showed that the workshop and handbook improved participants’ knowledge, attitudes and behaviour in practice. This was sustained over a three-month period. In telephone interviews, most participants said that the workshop had raised their awareness of engaging fathers and offered them helpful strategies. However, they also spoke of barriers to engagement with fathers. NHS Trusts need to review the training and education of Health Visitors and Community Practitioners and take a more strategic approach towards father-inclusive practice and extend services to meet the needs of fathers.

Rhetoric and Realities of London 2012 Olympic Education and Participation ‘Legacies’: Voices from the Core and Periphery

A legacy emphasis was one of the fundamental pillars of the London 2012 Olympic Games. The notion of an Olympic legacy was predicated on assumptions that the event’s value would not purely derive from the sporting spectacle, but rather, from the ‘success’ of enduring effects met out in London and across the country. For physical education students and practitioners, Olympic legacy agendas translated into persistent pressure to increase inspiration, engagement, participation and performance in the subject, sport and physical activity. Responding to this context, and cogniscent of significant disciplinary scholarship, this paper reports initial data from the first phase of a longitudinal study involving Key Stage Three (students aged 11-13) cohorts in two comparable United Kingdom schools: the first an inner-city (core) London school adjacent to the Olympic Park in Stratford, East London (n=150); the second, a (peripheral) school in the Midlands (n=198). The research involved the use of themed questionnaires focusing on self-reported attitudes toward the Olympic Games, and, experiences of physical education, sport and physical activity. Students from both schools demonstrated a wide variety of attitudes toward physical education and sport; yet, minor variances emerged regarding extreme enthusiasm levels. Both cohorts also expressed considerably mixed feelings toward the impending Olympic Games. Strong and variable responses were also reported regarding inspiration levels, ticketing acquisition and engagement levels. Consequently, this investigation can be read within the broader context of legacy debates, and, aligns well with physical educationalists’ on-going discomfort regarding legacy imperatives being enforced upon the discipline and its practitioners. Our work reiterates a shared disciplinary scepticism that while an Olympic Games may temporarily affect young peoples’ affectations for sport (and maybe physical education and physical activity), it may not provide the best, or most appropriate, mechanism for sustained attitudinal and/or social changes en masse.

Still Playing Together(?): A Recall to Physical Education and Sport History Intersections.

As academic disciplines, Physical Education and Sport History share interests in performance, participation, physique and the politics of corporeal praxis. Engendering unity between the two disciplines, however, has not been without concern. Scholars working within (and across) both fields have highlighted how the potential for shared knowledge production and meaning making has been, to a degree, stymied by epistemological and methodological criticism and trepidation. Issues over contextualization, rigour, narrative schemas, conceptualizations of the body, and notions of agency and power still, in particular, constrain our current educational and historical readings and renderings of physical culture(s). Scholarly schisms and methodological differences can be overcome, however, and need not prohibit disciplinary collaborations that might better address prevailing ethical questions and affect political cause; vis-à-vis the body, the physical and sport. This brief piece is, consequently, recourse to the scholarly symbiosis between Physical Education and Sport History and echoes the encouragement of our earlier colleagues to play, inquire, create and produce together.