The Glasgow 2014 XX Commonwealth Games and Scottish Independence: “Political Truce” or Political Truth(s)?

This paper explores the political reaction to Lord McConnell’s appeal for a political ‘truce’ in the form of a temporary halt to campaigning by all political parties and organisations involved in the debate regarding the Scottish independence referendum during the Glasgow 2014 Commonwealth Games (BBC, 2014; McConnell, 2014). Urging both sides of the debate to cease campaigning for the two-week period of the Glasgow 2014 games, the current Labour peer and past First Minister of the Scottish Parliament cited concerns that there are “genuine concerns that the Games, and the image of Scotland, could be damaged by attempts by either side – for and against – to use the Games to promote their cause, or to use the venues for campaigning” (McConnell, 2014). Drawing upon the principles of both a critical discourse and a narrative analysis methodological approach, this paper will scrutinise the nature of the political reactions to McConnell’s proposal from a variety of perspectives on both sides of the independence referendum debate. In particular, the emphasis in the responses from both sides of the debate regarding the apolitical nature of the 2014 Games will be critiqued, drawing upon the arguments of past analyses of sporting mega-events which highlight the potential for political exploitation of such events by the host nations (e.g. Horne, 2007; Grix, 2012; Houlihan and Giulianotti, 2012; Roche, 2006). Furthermore, the findings of academic research on the political implications of hosting the Commonwealth Games will be considered (e.g. Majumdar and Mehta, 2010; Van Der Westhuizen, 2004; Macintosh and Greenhorn, 1992; Majumdar, 2011; Lockstone and Baum, 2010; Macfarlane and Herd, 1986), highlighting a number of precedents which demonstrate the numerous challenges faced in any attempts to the keep the 2014 Games free from political influence.

'Team GB', 'Team England' or 'Team Scotland'? Media Representations of 'Britishness', 'Englishness' and 'Scottishness' in London 2012 and Glasgow 2014

Given the timing of the Scottish independence referendum in September 2014, the hosting of both the London 2012 Olympic Games and the Glasgow 2014 Commonwealth Games coincided with a period of considerable political turmoil and reflection within the United Kingdom. The extensive levels of public, political and media scrutiny of both of these major sporting events can therefore be framed within a wider consideration of the contemporary dynamics of the political union between the constituent nations of the UK, as well as the multifarious forms of national identities expressed within the various regions of the ‘nation-state’. Despite the growing influence of social media forms within contemporary society, politics and sport within the UK, the ‘traditional’ print media retain a central (although arguably diminishing) role in the dissemination of information relating to major societal, political and sporting issues to the British public. This paper will therefore critically reflect upon the nature of print media representations of ‘Britishness’, ‘Englishness’ and ‘Scottishness’ at London 2012 and Glasgow 2014 from both London-based and Scotland-based publications, drawing upon empirical data from completed and ongoing doctoral theses from the respective authors. In particular, the implications of the contrasting competitive structures of each event will be considered, given the symbolic differences between the unitary ‘Team GB’ at the London 2012 Olympics and the separated representative teams for Scotland and England at the Glasgow 2014 Commonwealth Games.

Doctoral Supervisor: Coach, Mentor or Master? Developing an Alternative Paradigm for Doctoral Supervision

This working paper is the second in a series of working papers presenting the on-going findings from a longitudinal research project grounded in exploring the experience of doctoral supervision and developing practice. In the first paper and phase one of this research study, Cook, Nichol and Loon (2014) explored the existing context for doctoral supervision and, drawing from literature on the problematic nature of doctoral supervision and coaching and mentoring, considered the value of drawing on coaching and mentoring models in formulating alternative paradigms for doctoral supervision. This paper reports the findings of phase one, a mixed methods study of experiences of doctoral supervision with supervisors and students in one UK university business school, from which the Collaborative Action Doctoral Supervision conceptual model emerged. The paper also introduces phase two, a collaborative action research study with doctoral supervisors and students who are applying, reflecting on and developing further this doctoral supervision model. We are aiming to answer the question of whether the use of coaching and mentoring in doctoral supervision enables the transfer and sustainability of learning from the doctoral supervision session to outside the experience and improves the quality. Is the doctoral supervisor coach, mentor or master? Key words Doctoral supervision, coaching, mentoring, collaborative action research.