Reducing Injury in Sport with Kids (RISK): an interpretive investigation into coaches' real-world experiences of injury prevention coach education

Garwood, Thomas J (2020) Reducing Injury in Sport with Kids (RISK): an interpretive investigation into coaches' real-world experiences of injury prevention coach education. Masters thesis, University of Gloucestershire. doi:10.46289/CR77ES71

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Background Injury prevention research has often failed to account for the ecological nature of sports injury prevention interventions (Donaldson et al., 2019). In addition, qualitative investigations delivery agent experiences with interventions are scarce (O’Brien and Finch, 2016) despite evidence of their usefulness in developing injury prevention programmes (McGlashan et al., 2018; Quarrie et al., 2020). As such, there remains limited understanding of the processes behind sports coaches’ engagement with injury prevention interventions and programmes. Coach learning research may aid in that understanding, with authors recently finding that a coach’s biography, experiences and learning dispositions impact their learning from formal and nonformal opportunities (Leeder et al., 2019; Stodter and Cushion, 2017). Recognising these influences may help uncover ‘what works, why and for whom’ (Leeder et al., 2019, p. 2) in sports injury prevention. Methodology This study aimed to evaluate county pathway cricket coaches’ experiences with three Reducing Injury in Sport with Kids workshops at different locations in the UK. Under the interpretivist paradigm, mixed-method qualitative approaches were used to collect data at three points. Three focus groups immediately after the RISK workshops, and two follow up interviews 10-12 weeks after the RISK workshops, were undertaken. One semi structured interview was conducted with the Key Stakeholder, 6 months after the RISK workshops. There were 19 focus group participants, 2 follow up interview participants and 1 Key Stakeholder. Data were analysed using inductive and deductive approaches and coded to find high and low-order themes. The RE-AIM framework was used to organise the high-order themes. Results At the individual level a process model is presented to better understand and explain how participants interacted with RISK. Using the RE-AIM dimensions two distinct stages were identified, the Process of Adoption and the Process of Implementation, and the interacting nature of the data was evident. The findings also suggest the influence of biography and professional context on county pathway coaches’ perceptions towards RISK. Minor county coaches identified a lack of resources, time and management buy in as key barriers to implementing RISK, however these were not necessarily present in the follow up interviews suggesting a mismatch between perceptions and actual practice. Key facilitators identified by participants in both minor and first-class settings were additional workshop resources and external support, which were corroborated in the follow up interviews. At the setting level, data emphasised the journey that a Key Stakeholder from the English Cricket Board went on to his adoption, and subsequent implementation, of RISK at three coach development days. Notable findings were the influence of professional experiences on the Key Stakeholders adoption of RISK. Conclusion This study evidenced the complex processes behind coach engagement with an injury prevention intervention. This research also contributed to a wider research project examining RISK and demonstrated how coach learning theory can complement sports injury prevention research. To address a potential research to practice gap (Bekker et al., 2016) recommendations for the implementation of RISK are made. These include: understanding that coaches may cherry pick aspects of RISK to fit with their practice, how a coach understands their role may impact their adoption of RISK, and coaches from different contexts will adopt, implement and maintain RISK in different ways and at different rates. At the setting level, evidence of the impact that a Key Stakeholder can have on the Implementation and Maintenance of a programme is provided, emphasising the ecological nature of injury prevention interventions and coach education initiatives.

Item Type: Thesis (Masters)
Thesis Advisors:
Thesis AdvisorEmailURL
Roberts, Willwroberts1@glos.ac.ukhttps://www.glos.ac.uk/staff/profile/will-roberts/
De Ste Croix, Markmdestecroix@glos.ac.ukhttps://www.glos.ac.uk/staff/profile/mark-de-ste-croix/
Subjects: G Geography. Anthropology. Recreation > GV Recreation Leisure > GV557 Sports > GV0711 Coaching
G Geography. Anthropology. Recreation > GV Recreation Leisure > GV557 Sports
Divisions: Schools and Research Institutes > School of Sport and Exercise
Research Priority Areas: Health, Life Sciences, Sport and Wellbeing
Depositing User: Rhiannon Goodland
Date Deposited: 27 Jan 2022 12:02
Last Modified: 27 Jan 2022 12:02
URI: https://eprints.glos.ac.uk/id/eprint/10622

University Staff: Request a correction | Repository Editors: Update this record

University Of Gloucestershire

Bookmark and Share

Find Us On Social Media:

Social Media Icons Facebook Twitter Google+ YouTube Pinterest Linkedin

Other University Web Sites

University of Gloucestershire, The Park, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, GL50 2RH. Telephone +44 (0)844 8010001.