Friendships are said to play a fundamental role within the concept of resilience (Daniel, 2008) which has been noted as significant for LACYP to succeed within their education (Woodhouse, 2013). Coman and Devaney (2011) argue that LACYP can have deficits in their capacity to form and sustain relationships due to their pre-care experiences (which may have included abuse or maltreatment), and has previously been noted as potentially affecting their experiences of PESS (Chapter 5, section 5.1). Ginsburg (2011) writes that children’s connections with others can be weak or limited if families move frequently and children have to leave friends behind. The discussion presented in Chapter 2 and the findings identified in Chapter 5 both provide evidence to suggest that LACYP are indeed susceptible to disruption in terms of moving home and/or school (Skuse et al., 2001; SEU, 2003; Clay and Dowling, 2004; Stein, 2005; Hayden, 2007; Hannon et al., 2010; APPG, 2012; Cameron et al., 2015). It is also well-documented that these movements can result in specific challenges for the individual, including the difficulties in building friendships and maintaining them (Shaw and Frost, 2013). This sits across several of the levels of McLeroy et al.’s (1988) social ecological framework, as not only can this difficulty with friendships be considered an interpersonal factor, it is also an institutional factor i.e. social services deciding whether to move the young person, thus changing their geographical and social environment. The data from the local authority respondents revealed that they felt establishing friendships was an important outcome for LACYP in taking part in school sport. The following extract from an interview with Robert Knight, VSH at Bucktonshire local authority, suggests that the importance of sport in providing friendships is due to LACYP displaying individual developmental issues:
Well most of the young people themselves would say you know “we want to be treated normally, we would like to be seen as no different to anyone else”. And actually, the social interaction and the working with a peer group and playing with a peer group is important. It may well be, although it’s not always the case, but in their early years there hasn’t been the same stimulus. And that neglect, and that kind of delay, means something is missing. So the opportunity to go and socialise, I think it’s really important for looked-after children. They’ll form those attachment friendships with others at the same time.
Additional research points to regular engagement in physical activity as a way for LACYP to raise their self-esteem, foster resilience and develop friendships (Gilligan, 1999; 2000; Hollingworth, 2012). The results from the local authority survey showed 92% of respondents believed that participating in PESS provided benefits for LACYP, with multiple references to creating ‘a sense of belonging’ and building ‘positive peer relationships’. Schofield et al. (2014, p.177) have argued that for LACYP “a sense of belonging is always complex and may include a range of families, friends and even professionals, all of whom may contribute and shape their identity and values”. When exploring this idea within the individual interviews, there was further support for the concept of being a ‘part of something’, as illustrated in the narrative below from an assistant VSH:
Lisa Phillips: I think with all those sort of extra-curricular activities, it gives them a sense of being in a group. It’s often with positive role models, y’know older coaches who are training them and they’re positive role models … I think, I think it’s about being with peers who are doing something positive rather than y’know, unfortunately for some of our looked-after children, they do sort of associate with negative peer groups. And it’s positive peer groups if you join a club and are part of a team.
The above extract conveys, perhaps, the significance of PESS for LACYP in establishing relationships at the interpersonal level of the social ecological model (McLeroy et al., 1988). However, much discussion from the respondents was directed at sport more generally and included sports clubs away from the school setting. Nonetheless, constructive activity outside of education is said to be an important part of improving self-esteem, confidence and self-efficacy for LACYP, in addition to fostering peer relationships (Schofield and Beek, 2009). This therefore reiterates the finding from Chapter 7, that participation in activities away from school and associated pressures may help young people foster positive friendships. The value of participation in sport for LACYP in terms of gaining friendships has also been highlighted in research findings from Europe (see Jackson et al., 2011). This has recently been recognised by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE) (2010) in which recommendations
were made to support children and young people in care to participate with peers in school and community activities to help build resilience and a sense of belonging. Indeed, a sense of belonging has long been established within literature surrounding sports participation (Ennis, 1999; Holt, 2008) and is directly linked to the ideology that interpersonal processes (i.e. establishing friendships and connections) can be achieved through participation in PESS (see Holt and Sehn, 2008). Debbie Howell, a VSH respondent from the north east of England, echoed this sentiment when she explained why she felt participating in PESS was important for LACYP:
A lot of it I think is to belong to something. I think it’s really important for a lot of our kids. To feel good about themselves and their abilities, to be part of a team. It helps with their relationships with other young people.
Likewise, similar findings were found amongst the data from the PE teacher survey. The results revealed that all respondents believed there were benefits for LACYP resulting from PESS participation, possibly a predictable finding given that they are the teachers of the subject. Nonetheless, for those who expanded on their answers, a clear focus was around developing friendships and feeling a sense of belonging. One PE teacher shared a specific example where a LACYP was “struggling with school life so came along to football after school and instantly made new friends". Donnelly and Coakley (2002) have stressed the importance of sport/physical activity programmes for fostering a sense of belonging and acceptance, which was also touched upon in Chapter 6 (section 6.3) in relation to Bradley’s and Lucy’s sentiments. Such data offer some substantiation to the literature that points to the value of sport in establishing friendships, or at least providing a sense of belonging. However, in the present study this appeared to remain the view of professionals working with LACYP; indeed, the building of friendships through PESS was not mentioned by any of the LACYP interviewed. Having said this, some LACYP respondents spoke of already having well-established peer groups, whereby the influence of those peers on participation in PESS was found to be significant. For example, Nathan explained that he participated in school sport prior to his upheaval in moving schools. The extract below from the interview with Nathan, focuses on understanding what made him decide to take part in extra-curricular sports activities:
CW: Did anyone encourage you to take part in those after school activities?
Nathan: Err the rugby team was probably cos most of my mates did it. Golf, same again, my mate was doing it.
Comparable findings have been documented in Norway, with the presence of friends being noted as having a positive influence on the desire of LACYP to engage in activities such as sport more often (Safvenbom and Samdahl, 2000). This was also certainly the case for some LACYP participants in this study. For Mia, friendships appeared to play a particularly important and supportive role within her life, as evidenced by her continual reference to them during the interview. It soon became clear that her friends were notably influential in her desire to participate in PESS:
CW: So what made you start taking part in those [extra- curricular activities] do you think?
Mia: My friends really, they’re like “Oh yeah let’s go up PE and do basketball or hockey”. I don’t think my friends have ever said hockey but yeah.
CW: Is that the same now when you take part in things?
Mia: Yeah, that’s the only reason I’ll do something other than music.
This is similar to the findings of Tannehill et al. (2015) who found that girls desire to participate in physical activity is linked to socialising with friends, in whatever activity they choose to do. The notable influence friends can have on LACYP participation in PESS was also recognised by those teaching LACYP, as David Andrews, Head of PE at Lushington Secondary School, explained:
If there’s a good friendship group that are staying behind, then I’m pretty sure they’ll be more comfortable, or they’d be more willing to step out of their comfort zone and stay behind, as opposed to not having that friendship circle … We’re all dependent on people aren’t we, we all need that dependency. And if we’ve had that root of support removed then we look to seek it elsewhere and often that’s friendship circles. I do think for evidence that I’ve seen, that friendship circles can be incredibly influential for looked-after children, more than other children.
David’s sentiment has also been reflected in previous research which points to the influence of friends on PE participation (e.g. Gorely et al., 2011; Maturo and Cunningham; 2013). For example, O’Donovan and Kirk (2008) note how young people build friendships with others similar to themselves or align themselves with particular groups who they share ideals with. In a similar vein, Kalaya expressed that although her school would offer school sport, her reason for not participating was due to her friends not choosing to do it:
CW: How about after-school activities, were they ever mentioned [in your PEP]?
Kalaya: Yeah, they said there’s a few activities like going on after school, if you’re interested in taking part then you can sign up at a certain place. But I never really did ‘cos my friend didn’t go.
As identified in Chapter 7, Kalaya was also not necessarily athletically inclined and it could be that her friends were similar in this respect. For Kalaya, her friends played an important role within her life, acting as her supportive network inside and outside of school when things became difficult at home. Nonetheless, the influence of peers at the interpersonal level of the social ecological model (McLeroy et al., 1988) transcends more widely than just impacting on their PESS experiences, and has been noted as impacting upon LACYP’s overall wellbeing. For instance, Selwyn (2015a) reports that maintaining and developing positive and trusting relationships were at the heart of children and young people’s concerns regarding their own wellbeing.
The evidence presented here from the youth respondents demonstrates the strong influence that friendships can have on the choices LACYP make with regards to PESS. Yet the data further revealed that for the other LACYP respondents, a lack of friendships meant this interpersonal influence did not exist as part of their PESS experiences. For those who expressed difficulties in developing positive relationships with peers, it highlights the potential of PESS in this respect (as a context that promotes interaction and collaboration); although previous findings within Chapter 7 suggest that the complex nature of their lives means that PESS may not necessarily be the platform in which to develop friendships if their interests lay elsewhere. Similar findings with regards to alternative interests were found by Safvenbom and Samdahl (1998) who discovered that LACYP spent most of their free time in solitude and were more likely to say that they wanted more self-involving activities, perhaps indicating an absence of friendships. However, it has been suggested that this could also be as a result of a lack of participation in these activities in the first place. For instance, Steckley (2005) noted that young people who rarely or had never participated in extracurricular activities were more likely to report having lower self-esteem and difficulty with friends. Enhanced self-esteem, self-efficacy and positive relationships have been noted as protective factors for those young people at risk of poor outcomes (e.g. Rutter, 1985, 1999; Gilligan, 1997; Daniel and Wassell, 2002b; Atwool, 2006; Armour et al., 2011). These are developments that have also been associated with PESS (see Bailey et al., 2009) and so highlights its potential in the positive development of LACYP. Paradoxically, however, Chapter 6 found that having low self- esteem could be a barrier to LACYP’s participation in PESS and, interestingly, the building of friendships through PESS was not perceived as an outcome by the LACYP who took part in this study. These raise some important questions for further discussion.
8.5 Summary
The empirical data presented in this chapter goes some way to highlighting the multiple social ecological influences (McLeroy et al., 1988) that are at play within LACYP’s experiences of PESS. The focus within this chapter predominantly identified the interpersonal relationships between LACYP and their teachers and peers. In so doing, the discussion has also drawn together some of the other themes (and sub-themes) that have crisscrossed this thesis, and, again, reinforces the complexity of LACYP’s lives and PESS
experiences. With regard to significant adults, this chapter has explored the important role of teachers within LACYP’s experiences of PESS. Where positive relationships were highlighted, it was found that teachers’ understanding of LACYP’s contexts and the potential impact of negative experiences were perceived to make a difference – particularly to the young people themselves - and provide valuable support within the school context. However, the data also revealed that the level of understanding shown by some teachers may not necessarily be standard practice across all schools. The discussion therefore suggested that best practice could perhaps be achieved through training for teachers, to help them identify ways to support and contribute to positive school and PESS experiences for LACYP.
Further interpersonal processes at play included LACYP’s friends as having a significant influence on their decisions (or not) to participate in school sport. Conversely, the data found that some LACYP had difficulties with making or maintaining friendships and so for those young people, this did not present as an influencing factor in terms of their PESS experiences. Much literature has pointed to the importance of developing positive peer relationships for LACYP’s resilience and the findings from this chapter contributes to the existing literature to suggest that PESS could potentially play a role here. Data from those adults within LACYP’s lives (namely local authority staff and PE teachers), rather than the LACYP themselves, emphasised a sense of belonging and establishing friendships as a significant outcome that LACYP could gain from participation in PESS. Yet, the social ecological context for each LACYP presents notable difficulties, as identified in Chapters 5, 6 and 7 in relation to their environment, wellbeing, educational engagement and support provided. The following final chapter now seeks to draw together the four data chapters that have been presented, to provide a concluding discussion of the dominant themes from the research and consider the implications of these findings. It closes with identification of the limitations of this study and an articulation of the need for further investigation in particular areas.
CHAPTER 9: CONCLUSION
9.0 Introduction
This study set out to explore the Physical Education and School Sport (PESS) experiences of children and young people who are, or have been at some point, looked-after, in order to provide a better understanding of the role such activities play within their lives and what factors might influence, shape and support their experiences. Over the course of the study, the research has taken many turns; evolving as a result of discussions, opportunities and challenges that have occurred, as well as through the exploration of additional research being conducted within this embryonic field. As noted, an established international body of research has focused on the potential benefits for young people experiencing positive sport and physical activities to, for example: reduce youth crime (Collins and Kay, 2003); tackle truancy and substance abuse (Shroeder, 2005); facilitate the reengagement of disadvantaged youth (Sandford et al., 2008a,b); and promote resilience (Holt, 2008). However, few studies have considered the role of sport and physical activity in the lives of looked-after children and young people (LACYP) and, to date, none have explored the role of schools in providing such opportunities/experiences through PESS. In this respect, the study builds on the work that has been done with regard to LACYP’s educational experiences and the limited body of research focusing on LACYP’s physical activity/sport experiences (e.g. Quarmby, 2014). It extends understanding by focusing specifically on physical activity/sport within an educational context (i.e. PESS), which has been suggested as potentially significant for LACYP (e.g. Armour et al., 2011; Quarmby, 2014). The research therefore addressed three key questions:
1. What role does PESS play in the lives of LACYP in England?
2. What affects LACYP’s motivations towards, participation in, and experiences of PESS?
3. Do LACYP’s experiences of care impact upon their experiences of PESS?
In addition to the usual sources of academic literature, the methodological framework for this research was also informed by initial scoping interviews undertaken with professionals and researchers working within the field. Acknowledging the importance of youth voice in research with, for, and on young people (Heath et al., 2009), the study has drawn upon
10 LACYP’s voices, in conjunction with local authority professionals and PE teachers, to provide insight and understanding regarding LACYP’s experiences of PESS. Generated through semi-structured surveys and interviews, the data were thematically analysed, in that the themes were ‘induced’ from the data as opposed to being predetermined (Ezzy, 2002). To provide clarity to the empirical data, a conceptual framework was adopted that would help assemble a picture of LACYP’s experiences through a multiplicity of perspectives. It was felt that the social ecological model39 (McLeroy et al., 1988) would be
useful in its application to the individual and environmental determinants that emerged through the analysis of data, since social ecological models have recently been used in additional studies relating to LACYP (e.g. Farineau, 2016; Quarmby and Pickering, 2016); thus highlighting their potential capacity in understanding the multifaceted contexts of LACYP’s lives.
The previous four chapters have identified and outlined key issues highlighted within the analysis of data generated in the study. Moreover, they have aimed to explore the PESS experiences of LACYP as they navigate their way through such complex environments, as well as examine how broader structures (policies and processes) and the enactment of these by key individuals (principally local authority staff and PE teachers) can/do shape LACYP’s practices. This process has identified some areas of convergence and coherence between the different groups of respondents (i.e. LACYP and local authority staff), as well as highlighted characteristics that are apparently unique to each individual LACYP. In so doing, the study has raised several key questions and issues pertaining to LACYP’s PESS experiences which are worthy of further consideration. A central finding of the research is that LACYP’s experiences of PESS are closely related to their experiences of school more generally, which is subsequently impacted upon by a variety of factors at all levels of their social ecology (McLeroy et al., 1988). Whilst also recognising the limitations of the research in terms of its representative value, this final chapter now looks to summarise the key issues identified through the analysis and start to outline questions they raise with regard to LACYP’s experiences of PESS (and also their experiences of education more broadly).